MASTER 
NEGA  TIVE 

NO .  92  -80825 


MICROFILMED  1993 
COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES/NEW  YORK 


as  part  of  the 
"Foundations  of  Western  Civilization  Preservation  Project" 


Funded  by  the 
NATIONAL  ENDOWMENT  FOR  THE  HUMANITIES 


Reproductions  may  not  be  made  without  permission  from 

Columbia  University  Library 


COPYRIGHT  STATEMENT 


The  copyright  law  of  the  United  States  -  Title  17,  United 
States  Code  -  concerns  the  making  of  photocopies  or 
other  reproductions  of  ( 


•  !• 


Under  certain  conditions  specified  in  the  law,  libraries  and 
archives  are  authorized  to  furnish  a  photocopy  or  other 
reproduction.  One  of  these  specified  conditions  is  that  the 
photocopy  or  other  reproduction  is  not  to  be  "used  for  any 
purpose  other  than  private  study,  scholarship,  or 
research.'*  If  a  user  makes  a  request  for,  or  later  uses,  a 
photocopy  or  reproduction  for  purposes  in  excess  of  "fair 
use,"  that  user  may  be  liable  for  copyright  infringement. 

This  institution  reserves  the  right  to  refuse  to  accept  a 
copy  order  if,  in  its  judgement,  fulfillment  of  the  order 
would  involve  violation  of  the  copyright  law. 


AUTHOR: 


BROWN,WILLIAM 
MONTGOMERY 


TITLE: 


THE  CHURCH  FOR 

AMERICANS 

PLACE: 

NEW  YORK 

DA  TE : 

1896 


COLUMBIA  UNIVERSITY  LIBRARIES 
PRESERVATION  DEPARTMENT 

BIBUQGRAPHICJMICRQFORMTAROFr 


Original  Material  as  Filmed  -  Existing  bibliographic  Record 


Master  Negative  # 

32-X0825'8 


B&l       I      CKu-rcU  ^o#/^ 


Amcnricwns... 


a^ab. 


571 


Imap 


1    -r* 


\ 


Restrictions  on  Use:  

TECTiN^lCALMlCROFORMDATA 

FILM     SIZE:      3fj!<.'L^^  REDUCTION    RATI0:_LLJ!: 

T^^^t^") '^^^V       INITIALS„_6^i^ 


/ 


,%, 


1 


r.o  a'^^  ^   «0. 


^. 


r 


Association  for  information  and  Image  Management 

1100  Wayne  Avenue.  Suite  1100 
Silver  Spring.  Maryland  20910 

301/587-8202 


Centimeter 

I         2        3        4         5        6        7        8        9       10       11       12       13       14       15   mm 


iiiiiiiiliiiiliiiiiiiiiliiii 


TTT 


Inches 


lllllllllllllMlMllljllll[llll|Mll|llllm 


FT  II   I   I 

1  2 


1.0 


I.I 


1.25 


2.8 


1^ 

IM     Bill  3.2 

|«3 


Itt 

■Ubia 


3.6 


I 

14.0 


1.4 


4 


2.5 


2.2 


2.0 


1.8 


1.6 


I 


MRNUFRCTURED  TO  flllM  STHNDFIRDS 
BY  APPLIED  IMRGE.    INC. 


/ 


f.  ^* 


!'«*>•.»' 


■'**»<.1 


*   -  -A 


>s;' 


7»\  / 


*"V 


■'^^ 


-♦-'  is 


- .  .:*? 


■'I  ill, 


Columbia  WiniiKvaitv 

intljeCitpof^togorfe 


LIBRARY 


I 

i 

\ 


f 

1 

V 

11 

« 

IB 

'' 

H 

r 

n 

Hb 

HI 

. 

^1 

■1 

H 

f,  f^ 

H 

tti.i 

m 

Xutograph  ^^rracntation  Copp. 


/"  ^^^^. 


^:^'^^K^iV'^? 


/^k 


^^'^.  x^. 


^^:^^^^^^ 


^ 


!    * 


■  •  t  «, 


•  • 


•  •  • 


•  «i   *  *     •' 
•  «   *  «  • 


«   II 


•  •    »  •  t 


:  t  c 


(  «  •    ■  t  ■   C 


ii 


Hi 


HI 


71  E 
•^  s 

w 

z  x: 

3 

"SJ  o 
<a  u 

^X- 

ox: 
o 

t-  a»  t* 
c-x:  q» 
_  ^  in 

p-  • 
•£  EQ 

l|< 

3  r  c 

c  >>— 
c       ^ 


.-  PS 


« 


c  E 

at  «•* 

ex:  *? 

"    I-    w. 

(/)  a^  '-;= 
■"03  a, 

■-  V  ^ 
f  Ij  c 
!/l   3   K 

3,-vx; 


o-s 


=  .!£  a. 


<u 


41    >» 


•^  «w  H 
o      <u 

'^      ^*      Zm 

^■5-5 
iU£ 

o  lu 


I  •     •(„ 


•  -•    ». 


•  •    •  t  I     I 


y.'u 


•  *'  •  • 


I  •      •    * 


•  •  t 


•  t  I 


« 


.;:;  ta 


C-i   o 


3         = 

C  >.— 
C    t/-n 


.—  d 


<u 


"     •  <* 

r.   ->'<. 

'^  ■—  ^ 

■5r3  2 

,^  =  E 
o  "  - 

■"CQ    (y 

•=  j;  c 

yi    3    i> 

<  J  ix 
-  .!£  'E. 

v^  U.    Q, 

5  <w  i; 


z      <u 


•n  '? 

c  # 


a> 


3"~   ^ 


i/i-rr 


-«    3 


li 


iU.E 

^/■.  =  s 


1 


•   ,< 


I  «. ..     •  •      » 


•      e    «  '  'F     •    t     ■'-■  ■• 


•  *'  •   • 


1  * 

HI 


>  -> ,  >    ) 


THE 


Church  for  Americans 


BY 

William  Montgomery  Brown, 

>  k  > 

Archdeacon  of  Ohio;    Lecturer  at  Bexley  Hall,  the  Theological  Seminary 

of   Kenyon  College. 


£}(j  de  Xiyto  eh  JCpifftov  koI  eh  ryv  EKKlrjaiav. 


— Ephbsians,  V :  32. 


FOURTH  EDITION 


REVISED  AND  ENLARGED, 


NEW  YORK: 
THOMAS  WHITTAKER, 

2  AND  3  Bible  House. 
1806. 


r  *        c     f 


,    ■;   «      t    «       «     • 
t     t     •  f  •     ' 


«  *  .  «     *        « 


«    «        • 


t  *  • 

t 

•  t 


«  .     f  1  • 


t  •      1    ..  «■ 


•      ■  •  * 


t 

•  »  ■  »'        *  ■  ■ ..    *:■   •  .  •    •  t  • 


•  • 


•  » 


1 »    *       • 


t     •  •  • 


.1,     •    1 1  •    •     *  •  •  *  • :      t 
•      ••  i    ,,  ,   ,  ••••  ••  •••••■•"• 


Copyright,  1895, 

BY 
WILLIAM  MONTGOMERY  BROWN. 


CSOPY  RIGHT,  1896, 

BY 

WILLIAM  MONTGOMERY  BROWN. 


MADE  BY 

THE  WERNER  COMPANY, 

AKRON,  OHIO. 


TO 
MY    BELOVED    WIFE, 

ELLA   BRADFORD    BROWN, 

AND    HER    MOTHER, 

MARY   SCRANTON   BRADFORD, 

TRUE   AND   INSPIRING  HELPERS  OF  THE   AUTHOR  IN   HIS  LIFE'S  WORK, 

THIS    VOLUME   IS 

AFFECTIONATELY   AND   GRATEFULLY 

DEDICATED. 


[I 


PREFACE. 


"The  Time  Will  Come  When  Three  Words  Uttered 
WITH  Charity  and  Meekness  Shall  Receive  a  Far  More 
Blessed  Reward  Than  Three  Thousand  Volumes 
Written  with  Disdainful  Sharpness  of  Wit." 

— Hooker. 


(jv) 


AS  the  origin  of  a  book  is  often  of  interest  to  the 
reader,  I  will  explain  that  this  work  is  along 
lines,  which,  as  a  Missionary,  1  have  followed  for 
many  years  in  my  addresses  and  conversations  con- 
cerning the  Church.    I  was  first  induced  by  the  request 
of  the  Kt.  Rev.  Dr.  Leonard,  Bishop  of  Ohio,  to  elab- 
orate my  talks  into  formal  lectures,  in  the  hope  that 
they  might  contribute  in  some  degree  to  the  excellent 
preparation  which  our  Missionary  recruits  are  receiving 
at  the  Divinity  School  of  Kenyon  College.  .After  their 
delivery  to  the  Theological  students,  it  was  thought 
that  they  would  not  be  without  interest  to  Sunday 
School  teachers  and  others  who  now  and  then  are  called 
upon   to   commend    or   defend   our    beloved   Church. 
Accordingly  they  have  been  made  the  basis  of  Lenten 
discourses  to  general  congregations  in  Trinity  Church, 
Toledo,  and  the  Cathedral  Parish,  Cleveland.    Finally, 
I  have  been  persuaded  by  the  representations  of  many 
who  heard  them  that,  if  published,  they  would  make  a 
useful  book  for  distribution  among  those  who  have  been 
reared  under  Denominational  or  Roman  influences,  and 
supply  the  need,  often  felt  by  Lay  readers  and  young 
missionaries,  of  a  course  of  Confirmation  instructions 
about  the  Church. 

(V) 


▼1 


PREFACE. 


"t 


Til©  concern  which  this  book  manifests  for  the 
Ecclesiastical  side  of  Christianity  and  the  little  it  has  to 
say  about  its  spiritual  and  practical  aspects,  is  due  to 
what  the  writer  cjoiiBiders  to  be,  just  now,  the  8i)ecial 
reli<>ious  need  of  our  time  and  country.  This  is  not 
instruction  in  the  moral  requirements  of  Christianity  so 
much  as  the  establishment  of  the  fact  that  Christ 
founded  a  Church  which  has  come  down  to  us,  and  with 
some  branch  of  which  it  is  the  privilege  and  duty  of  all 
to  identify  themselves.  The  idea  that  "one  Church  is 
as  good  as  another"  and  that  consequently  "it  jnac- 
tically  makes  no  difference  to  which  we  belong,"  is 
responsible  for  the  enormous  non-church  element  of  tk© 
United  States,  which,  according  to  the  last  census, 
amounted  to  more  than  half  of  the  whole  population, 
and  for  the  loose  hold  which  all  bodies  of  Christians 
have  upon  their  constituency. 

Under  such  circumstances  ff!  becomes  a  matter  of 
first  importance  that  the  duty  of  belonging  to  the 
National  branch  of  the  one  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ, 
and  the  evil  of  separation  from  it,  should  be  set  forth 
in  season  and  out  of  season.  In  proportion  as  this  is 
done,  the  Episcopal  Church  will  be  built  up  and  held 
together.  Our  incomparable  Liturgy,  impressive  Serv- 
ices, and  attractive  yearly  round  of  varied  Holy  Sea- 
sons, are  indeed  annually  drawing  thousands  to  this 
fold ;  but  others  in  great  numbers  who  care  compara- 
tively little  for  these  things,  come  because  they  believe 
this  Church  to  be  historicallv  and  canonically  the 
American  as  well  as  our  racial  branch  of  Christ's 
Church,  and  that,  therefore,  she  possesses  exclusive 
claims  to  allegiance.  Every  one  who  is  influenced  by 
this  conviction,  is  worth  ten  of  such  as  are  attracted 
only  by  aesthetic  considerations.  Those  who  are  in  the 
Church  simply  because  of  natural  ties,  or  on  account  of 


PREFACE. 


VU 


her  attractive  features,  are  often  drawn  away  by  coun- 
ter influences  and  alienated  the  'moment  that  all  does 
not  go  on  according  to  their  liking.  But  Episcopalians 
who  are  such  from  piinciple  rather  than  preference— 
and,  thank  God,  this  class  is  rapidly  increasing— stand 
by  the  Church  through  all  the  changes  and  chances  of 

parochial  life. 

I  have  an  instance  in  mind  of  a  person  who,  upon 
coming  to  a  village  where  our  Mission  was  weak  and 
the  Presbyterians  and  Methodists  wei-e  strong  both 
socially  and  numerically,  was  asked  by  a  caller :  "  What 
Church  do  you  and  your  husband  expect  to  attend?" 
Upon  replying  that  they  were  members  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  her  interrogator  said :  ''  But  that  Church  is  so 
new  and  small  and  has  no  standing  in  the  community. 
I  think  you  will  find  it  much  more  to  your  taste  to  be 
identified  with  one  of  the  big  churches  where  the  other 
members  of  the  social  circle  to  which  you  will  belong 
all  go.  Mrs.  B.,  an  estimable  lady  who  recently  came 
to  town,  was  an  Episcopalian  but,  after  going  once  or 
twice  to  the  little  Chapel,  she  left  and  joined  the  Pres- 
byterian Church  where  she  is  now  a  leading  member. 
We  like  her  very  much  and  should  be  glad  if  you  and 
Mr.  C.  would  follow  her  example."  To  this  the  self-re- 
specting and  consistent  answer  was  made:  ''We  are 
not  that  kind  of  Episcopalians.  We  became  members  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  rather  than  of  any  other  Chiis- 
tian  body  because,  after  studying  into  the  matter,  we 
believed  it  our  duty  to  do  so.  I  am  sorry  to  hear  of 
the  feeble  condition  of  my  Church  and  of  the  infrequent 
Services  by  a  Lay  reader  instead  of  by  a  Clergyman. 
But  this  is  all  the  more  reason  why  we  should  be  true 
to  our  colors  and  lend  a  helping  hand."  This  consis- 
tency on  the  part  of  an  infiuential  new-coming  family 
was  the  making  of  the  mission. 


PREFACE. 


PREFACE. 


IX 


frt 


I  am  under  great  oWlgation  to  some  ten  or  twelve 
learned  and  judicious  Clergymen  of  the  Diocese  of  Ohio 
for  their  painstaking  and  helpful  criticisms.  Especially 
am  I  indebted  to  the  Very  Rev.  Francis  M.  Hall,  M.A., 
for  invaluable  assistance  in  preparing  the  manuscript 
for  the  printer,  and  to  Canon  D.  F.  Da  vies,  M.A.,  for 
some  exceptionally  important  suggestions  and  a  careful 
reading  of  the  proofs.  I  desire  also  to  thank  the  Rev. 
A.  E.  Dldroyd,  M.A.,  of  Oundle,  England,  for  kind  per- 
mission  to  use  some  of  the  excellent  charts  in  his  able 
pamphlet  on  "  The  Continuity  of  the  English  Church 
through  Eighteen  Centuries,"  and  the  Rt.  Rev.  William 
Stevens  Perry,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  D.C.L.,  Bishop  of  Iowa,  and 
other  experts  in  special  branches  of  learning  who  were 
good  enough  to  answer  my  letters  of  incjuiry  and  to 
send  me  some  of  their  valuable  publications,  and  last, 
but  not  least,  my  printers,  The  Werner  Company,  of 
Akron,  Ohio,  and  their  efficient  and  obliging  employees 
who  have  been  uniformly  courteous  and  patient. 

I  shall  feel  amply  repaid  for  the  time  and  labor  ex- 
pended upon  this  work,  if,  by  God's  blessing,  it  shall 
prove,  to  any  degTee,  instrumental  in  persuading  non 
church  members  to  make  a  profession  of  Christ  by 
identifying  themselves  with  His  Church ,  in  adding  t© 
the  number  of  well-instructed  persons  who  come  to  us 
from  the  Denominational  and  Roman  communions  be- 
cause fully  convinced  of  this  Church's  Divine  and  supe- 
rior claims  to  their  allegiance,  and  in  increasing  the 
appreciation,  love,  and  zeal  of  Episcopalians  for  their 
pure  brancjli  of  tb^  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church. 

W.  M.  B. 

Trinity  Cathedral,  Cleveland,  Ohio, 
St.  Luke's  Day,  1895. 


PREFACE  TO  THE  FOURTH  EDITION. 


Owing  to  the  urgent  recommendation  of  fiiends,  my 
humble  effort  to  set  forth  the  superior  claims  of  the 
Anglican  Communion  to  the  exclusive  allegiance  of 
English  speaking  people,  written  especially  for  Ameri- 
cans, was  published  a  year  earlier  than  was  intended 
and,  accordingly,  the  First  Edition  lacked  a  great 
many  finishing  touches.  When  it  became  manifest  that 
the  demand  for  the  book  would  greatly  exceed  my  ex- 
pectation, every  spare  moment  that  could  be  com- 
manded was  given  to  the  work  of  revision.  A  few  cor- 
rections and  changes  were  made  in  the  Second  Edition, 
but  there  was  no  time  between  it  and  the  Third  for 
further  alterations  in  the  plates.  It  was  then  deter- 
mined that  the  Fourth  Edition  should  be  as  free  from 
blemishes  and  points  for  cavil  as  possible.  Fortunately 
the  summer  vacation  gave  me  the  necessary  leisure  for 
the  carrying  out  of  this  resolve. 

The  many  letters  of  warm  commendation  and  friendly 
criticism  received  from  Clergymen  and  Laymen  have 
been  a  great  encouragement  and  help  to  me.  Those  to 
whom  I  am  most  indebted  are:  the  Rt.  Rev.  Thomas 
Underwood  Dudley,  D.D.,  LL.D.,  D.C.L.,  Bishop  of  Ken- 
tucky and  Chancellor  of  the  University  of  the  South ; 
the  Rt.  Rev.  Hugh  Miller  Thompson,  S.T.D.,  LL.D., 
Bishop  of  Mississippi;  the  Rev.  W.  C.  Hopkins,  D.D., 
City  Missionary  of  Toledo;  the  Rev.  Wm.  Jones  Sea- 
bury,  D.D.,  Charles-and-Elizabeth-Ludlow  Professor  of 
Ecclesiastical  Polity  and  Law  in  the  General  Theological 
Seminary,  New  York;  the  Rev.  Wm.  C.  McCxacken, 
M.A.,  Rector  of  St.  Martin's  Church,  Fairmont,  Minne- 


Ir 


X  PREFACE. 

8ota;  the  Rev.  G.  H.  H.  Butler,  B.A.,  Curate  o!  the 
Church  of  the  Ascension,  Mount  Vernon,  New  York; 
and  some  unknown  critic  and  friend  of  great  learning 
who  signed  his  several  most  important  communica- 
tions with  the  pseudonym,  "A  Layman." 

One  of  the  most  scholarly  and  conservative  Clergymen 
of  this  country  accompanied  his  valuable  corrections 
and  suggestions  with  the  gratifying  assurance  that  the 
First  Edition  of  the  Church  for  Americans  "brings  out 
the  whole  case  so  that  no  one  can  be  seriously  misled  by 
any  of  its  statements ;  and  so  that  in  point  of  principle 
and  historical  fact  the  reader  who  gets  his  first  impres- 
sions from  it  must  inevitably  be  started  in  the  right 
direction.  He  would  never  feel  himself  to  have  been 
misled  or  obliged  to  deny  the  substance  of  what  you 
have  taught  him."  Many  others  have  given  expression 
to  the  same  comforting  opinion.  If  this  is  true  of  the 
Srst  three  editions  it  will  be  much  more  so  of  the  fourth. 

It  is  believed  that  the  value  of  the  book  has  been 
materially  increased  by  the  addition  of  the  last  nine- 
teen sections  to  the  Appendices  and  an  Index  of  Refer- 
ences to  Quotations. 

I  desire  to  record  here  ray  gratitude  to  God  for  the 
blessing  of  strength  and  the  grace  of  perseverance  which 
have  enabled  me,  notwithstanding  the  constant  travel- 
ing and  the  many  engrossing  duties  of  a.  General  Mis- 
Bionary  of  an  extensive  and  populous  Diocese,  to 
complete  a  book  that  has  required  so  much  more  work 
than  was  at  first  anticipated.  .  AV.  M.  B. 

Trinity  Cathedral,  Cleveland,  Ohio, 

Feast  of  St.  Michael  and  All  Angels,  1896. 


CONTENTS. 


PAGE 

Introductory 1 

LECTURE  I. 
Church  Membership 15 

LECTURE  TI. 
Our  Controversy  with  RoiManists 51 

LECTURE  IIL 
Our    Controversy   with    Dknominationalists 147 

LECTURE  IV. 
The   Mother   Church  of  England 215 

LECTURE  V. 
The  American   Church c ,   259 

LECTURE  VI. 
Ob.tections  to  the  Episcopal  Church 311 

LECTURE  VII. 
Why   Americans  Should  Be  Episcopalians 357 

Appendices   and  Supplementary  Articles 403 

xi 


Hi 


ILLUSTRATIONS. 


I 


•I 


.  t 


f   I 


**  Thus  Saith  the  Lord,  Stand  Ye  in  the  Ways, 
AND  See,  and  Ask  for  the  Old  Paths,  Where  Is  the 
Good  Way,  and  Walk  Therein,  and  Ye  Shall  Find 

Rest  for  Your  Souls." 

— Jeremiah  vi:16 


FACING 
PAGE 


St.  Martin's  Church,  Canterbury  {Frontispiece.) 
Diagram,  Showing  the  Episcopal  Descent  of   Par- 
ker  Traced  Back  Four   Successions 127 

Diagram,  Showing  That  the  Anglican  Communion 
THROUGH  Archbishop  Laud  Has  the  Apostolic 
Succession  Independently  of  Archbishop  Par- 


ker 


130 


Diagram,  Showing  That  the  Present  Episcopate  of 
the  Anglican  Communion  Can  Trace  Its  De- 
scent THROUGH  Archbishop  Laud  to  Italian, 
Welsh,  Irish,  and  Eastern  Lines  of  Succession  131 

Diagram,    Showing    the     Origin    of    the    British 

Church  to  Have  Been  Independent  of  Rome.  236 

Map,  Showing  the  Parts  Taken,  Respectively,  by 
THE  Native  and  Roman  Missionaries  in  the 
Conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons 240 

•  •  • 

Xlll 


(xii) 


til 


i-l 


"  The  Search  for  Truth  Is  Not  Half  So  Pleasant 
As  Sticking  to  the  Views  We  Hold  at  Present." 


I 


(xiv) 


•  »       »  ^ 


C    -  »       4  ,,    » 


»     J   »         »     » 


>  7         .       ■♦    - 

>  '  »  1  i  »    J  »  >     .-  ' 


«  1  J    >  I 


«  •   i    t  1      .)    J     J    ' 


»    >   1 


•  1  »  .»  1 


INTRODUCTORY. 


IN  our  day  and  country  there  is,  as  everybody 
knows,  a  vast  non  church  membersliip  population. 
eTudging  from  a  somewhat  extended  personal  ob- 
servation, 1  should  say  that  at  least  one-half  of  the 
men  and  a  third  of  the  women  are  not  identified  with 
any  form  of  organized  Christianity.  This  is  not  be-\ 
cause  Americans,  at  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  cen-  \ 
tury,  are  preeminently  skeptical  and  irreligious,  but 
because  the  opinion  so  widely  prevails  that  a  person 
can  be  as  good  a  Christian  outside  of  the  Church  and 
without  the  use  of  the  Sacraments  and  means  of  grace 
as  with  them.  / 

The  neglect  of  institutional  religion  is  accounted  for 
by  the  exaggerated  importance  which  was  attached  to 
it  by  Catholic  Christendom  in  the  Mediaeval  Ages,  and 
is  still  attributed  to  it  by  Romanism.  When  we  con- 
sider the  tendency  of  human  nature  to  go  from  one 
extreme  to  another,  we  shall  not  wondc'  ^hat  the 
Reformation,  in  which  Wick^'^Te,  Husb,  i^uther,  Calvin 
and  Knox  took  such  prominent  parts,  has  manifested  a 
disposition  to  depreciate  the  Church  with  her  Priest- 
hood and  Sacraments,  and  to  magnify  certain  Evangel- 
ical doctrines  and  the  preaching  of  them.  Romanists 
made  salvation  to  depend  upon  belonging  to  the 
Church ;  therefore,  Protestants  hinged  it  upon  belief  in 
a  dogma.    Then  the  pendulum  of  human  opinion,  which 

C.  A. — 1  /-i » 


\ 


|! 


f 


THE    CHrRCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


rf  • 


'never  contlrtf tfift  ^e  iifay,6egan  to  swing  away  from 
both  Romanism  and  'l^rotestantism  towards  what  is 
called  praidttekl .' "reVgiba,  atid  has  p:one  on  in  that 
direction  until  many  hi' every  community,  having'  re- 
nounced* .tooth  '  E/jl!l6siiisticisili  and  dogmatism,  are 
relying-  wholly  upoii 'ftibr^rKVing-  and  good  works  for 
isalvation.  The  representatives  of  institutional,  doc- 
/  trinal  and  practical  Christianity  are  now  widely  sepa- 
rated, and  between  them,  apparently,  a  great  and 
bridgeless  gulf  is  fixed.  And,  what  at  first  sight  seems 
surpassingly  strange  and  even  inexplicable,  they  are 
strongly  fortified  in  their  respective  positions  by  walls, 
the  stones  of  which  are  hewn  from  the  rock  of  Holv 
Scripture.  And  so  impregnable  are  these  fortifications 
that,  notwithstanding  each  has  been  bombarded  for 
tliese  many  years  by  ponderous  controversial  artillery, 
no  practicable  breach  has  been  effected. 

Now,  how  shall  we  account  for  this?  Does  the  Bible, 
mit  of  which  the  contending  hosts  have  constructed 
their  defenses,  contradict  itself?  God  forbid!  It  does 
nothing  of  the  kind.  The  solution  is  rather  in  the  fact 
that  the  Divine  quarry  contains  more  than  one  stratum 
of  truth.  There  is  an  institutional,  a  doctrinal  and  a 
practical  stratum.  Christ  founded  a  Church  to  be  en- 
tered; He  appointed  Sacraments  to  he  received;  He 
taught  doctrines  to  be  believed,  and  He  set  an  exam- 
ple of  good  works  to  be  followed.  Salvation  depends 
in  due  proportion  upon  all  of  these,  not  upon  one  of 
them  alone.  These  have  been  joined  together  by  God; 
therefore,  "let  no  man  put  them  asunder." 

If  iu  this  book  a  great  deal  is  said  about  Church 
membership  and  comparatively  little  concerning  the 
necessity  of  right  living  or  believing,  it  is  because  we 
have  written  chiefly  for  those  w^ho,  whether  as  Doc- 
trinalists  or  I'racticalists,  have  either  quite  divorced 


ii 


INTRODUCTORY.  & 

themselves  from  the  Church,  or  else  have  learned  to  es- 
teem her  altogether  too  little.  We  would  not  have  any 
reader  make  less  of  doctrinal,  (certainly  not  of  practical 
Christianity,  but  w^ould  persuade  many  to  attach  more 
importance  to  the  institutional  side  of  our  religion. 
Accordingly,  we  have  endeavored  to  promote  the  con- 
viction that  every  person  is  in  duty  bound  to  identify 
himself  with  some  branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 

It  may  as  well  be  confessed  here  that  our  object  is 
not  only  to  persuade  non  church  members  to  unite  with 
some  one  of  the  many  organizations  of  Christians,  but 
particularly  with  the  Episcopal  Church.  Moreover,  we 
have  been  guilty  of  keeping  in  mind  our  Denomina- 
tional and  Roman  brethren, in  the  hope  that  what  we 
have  to  say  will  induce  some  of  them  to  come  over  to 
us.  Many  condemn  such  efforts  as  betokening  a  want 
of  broadmindedness  and  charity  towards  other  Chris- 
tian bodies.  Those  who  pride  themselves  upon  their 
*' non-sectarianism" — and  there  are  multitudes  of  such 
in  every  community  —  characterize  as  bigots  all  who  do 
not  acknowledge  that  one  Denomination  is  as  good  as 
another,  and  contend  that  it  makes  practically  no  dif- 
ference to  which  of  them  one  belongs,  since  all  will  lead 
us  to  the  same  Heaven  if  we  but  trust  in  Christ  and 
follow  Him. 

So  plausible  and  pleasing  is  this  representation  to 
people  generally,  that  the  assertion  of  convictions  which 
run  counter  to  it  is  usually  listened  to  with  impa- 
tience. And  yet  no  observing  and  reflecting  person  can 
fail  to  discover  the  hollowiiess  of  the  pretensions  of 
those  who  affect  this  liberality.  Nothing  can  be  plainer 
than  that  they  regard  the  Denomination  with  which 
they  have  cast  their  lot  as  being,  at  least  in  some  re- 
spects, better  than  any  other.  The  evidence  of  this  is 
found  in  the  very  existence  and  continuance  of  their  sect. 


THE   CHURCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


It  would  never  have  been  organized  if  its  charter  mem- 
bers had  not  regarded  their  creation  as  superior  to 
others  of  the  kind ;  and  it  would  soon  have  died  out  but 
for  the  conviction  of  its  superiority  which  continued  to 
possess  its  adherents.  Sects,  like  political  parties, 
originate  and  perjietuate  their  existence  because  their 
peculiar  principles  attract  men  and  hold  them  together. 
This  being  the  case,  no  one  who  is  governed  by  conviction 
and  principle  can  be  ''non-sectarian."  All  such  must 
feel  it  a  duty  to  assert  and  prove  superior  claims  to 
allegiance  for  the  Denomination  with  which  they  are 
connected.  Hence,  though  the  writer  may  have  had 
some  hesitancy  arising  from  the  dread  of  adverse  criti- 
cism, he  has  had  no  qualms  of  conscience  in  trying  to 
make  it  appear  that  the  Episcopal  Church  can  establish 
luperior  claims  to  the  allegiance  of  Americans. 

But  this  work  was  not  prepared  exclusively  with  ref- 
erence to  non  church  members  and  the  members  of  other 
Christian  bodies.  Indeed,  it  was  primarily  intended  for 
the  instruction  of  our  own  people.  The  accessions  to 
the  Episcopal  Church  from  the  various  Denominations 
have  been  increasing  until  they  constitute  a  large  per- 
centage, often  the  principal  part,  of  our  Confirmation 
classes.  These  converts  are,  as  a  rule,  good,  enthusiastic 
Episcopalians.  But  in  many  cases  there  is  reason  to 
fear  that  the  change  of  Church  relationship  may  be  ac- 
counted for  upon  the  ground  of  superficial  preferences 
rather  than  deep-rooted  conviction.  It  is  highly  desir- 
able, both  on  the  convert's  and  the  Church's  account, 
that  he  should  be  able  to  justify  his  course  on  the  score 
of  principle.  Those  who  cannot  do  this,  and  there  are 
many  such  in  nearly  all  of  our  congregations,  have 
been,  we  think,  insufficiently  instructed. 

The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  is  doubtless  correct  in 
the  supposition  that  ''there  is  perhaps  not  even  now 


INTRODUCTORY. 


5 


one  Churchman  in  ten  who  is  as  well  instructed  in  the 
reason  why  he  is  a  Churchman  as  Dissenters  or  Roman 
Catholics  are  instructed  in  the  arguments  whereby  their 
position  is  defended.  This  should  surely  be  remedied." 
For  those  who  are  not  well  grounded  in  Church  princi- 
ples are  apt  to  be  more  or  less  disturbed  by  the  asser- 
tions and  objections  of  Denominationalists  on  the 
one  hand  and  of  Romanists  on  the  other.  And  in  de- 
fending their  transfer  of  allegiance  they  are  seldom  able 
to  do  themselves  or  their  Church  justice.  In  fact  they 
not  infrequently  do  more  harm  than  good  to  all  con- 
cerned. It  is  believed  that  the  facts  and  arguments  of 
these  pages  will  enable  those  who  have  come  into  the 
Church  from  Denominationalism  and  Romanism,  or  are 
about  to  do  so,  to  justify  their  action  upon  principle  as 
well  as  from  preference. 


Throughout  this  work  the  isolated  and  neglected 
brethren,  of  whom  there  are  many  in  the  rural  commu- 
nities of  alrhost  every  part  of  the  United  States,  have 
also  been  kept  in  view.  Such  are  strongly  tempted  to 
turn  their  back  upon  the  Church  of  their  birth  or  adop- 
tion. After  living  for  some  time  Avithout  her  Services, 
and  becoming  convinced  that  there  is  no  immediate 
prospect  of  their  establishment,  in  the  majority  of  cases, 
they  finally  yield  to  the  pressing  solicitations  of  the  rep- 
resentatives of  some  one  of  the  established  Denomina- 
tions to  cast  in  their  lot  with  them.  In  this  way  it 
has  come  about  that  in  many  Dioceses  the  Church  has 
lost  the  allegiance  of  as  many  communicants  as  she 
now  possesses.  The  writer  could  mention  several  towns 
in  Ohio,  in  which  the  "bone  and  sinew"  of  some 
strong  Denomination  is  composed  of  lapsed  Church 
people. 


)i 


9 


i!l 


II 


m 


I 


O  THE   CHURCH    FOE    AMERICANS. 

This  leakage  is  largely  accounted  for  by  tlie  lack  of 
the  missionary  spirit  on  the  part  of  our  great  city  con- 
gregations. From  every  point  of  view  the  failure  of  city 
Churchmen  to  minister  to  their  country  brethren,  by 
taking  the  Church  to  out-of-the-way  places  and  helping 
to  maintain  it,  has  been  a  mistake.  Not  only  have  we 
lost  the  nucleus  for  a  congi-egation  that  at  one  time  or 
another  has  existed  in  almost  every  village,  but  also  all 
the  multitudes  that  would  have  been  added  to  them, 
had  we  been  wise  enough  to  plant  and  nourish  missions 
before  the  ground  was  preoccupied  and  our  constitu- 
ency alienated. 

Moreover,  the  Church  in  our  <  ities,  though  usually 
strong  and  often  the  dominant  body  of  Christians,  is 
much  weaker  than  it  would  have  been,  had  the  city 
Churchman  not  refused  to  be  his  country  and  village 
brother's  keeper.    The  drift  in  this  country  has  been  and 
is  from  the  smaller  towards?  the  larger  centers  of  pop- 
ulation.   The  operation  of  this  law^  of  centralization 
has  constantly  weakened  the  rural  and  strengthened  the 
city  Churches.    In  the  Diocese  of  Ohio  many  of  our 
congregations  in  the  large  cities  and  towns  are  greatly 
indebted  to  more  or  less  obscure  villages  and  hamlets 
where  the  Apostolic  Chase,  Searle,  Hall,  and  others,  had 
the  wisdom  to  plant  the  Church  in  the  earl  v  days     Had 
their  policy  of  strengthening  the  weak  things  that  re- 
main, by  establishing  Services  wherever  two  or  three  of 
ourpeoplecouldbe  found  and  a congi-egation  assembled, 
been  continued,  the  Church  would  now  be  probably  two 
or  three  times  stronger  than  it  is.    If  the  expectation 
that  this  book  will   tend  to  make  the  Episcopalian 
reader  a  Churchman  from  conviction  is  not  disappointed 
It  will  also  make  him  a  missionary.    Nothing  extraor- 
dinary m  the  way  of  gifts  or  work  for  the  cause  of 
Church  extension  can    be  expected  of  those  who  are 


INTRODUCTORY. 


Episcopalians  rather  than  Denominationalists  from 
preference  only. 

And  if  what  we  have  to  say  promotes  the  missionary 
spirit  among  the  favored  Church  people  of  our  cities,  it 
will  at  the  same  time  tend  to  restrain  "the  neglected 
shee])  of  the  wilderness"  from  wandering  away  from 
this  fold  of  Christ,  the  Church  of  their  fathers.  There 
are  scattered  here  and  there  through  Ohio,  and  no 
doubt  the  same  is  true  of  every  undeveloped  Diocese, 
men  and  women  who  have  been  without  the  Services  of 
the  Church  for  as  many  as  thirty,  forty,  and  even  fifty 
years,  and  yet  have  remained  her  faithful  children  dur- 
ing all  this  time.  These,  as  a  rule,  have  gone  regularly 
to  some  Denominational  place  of  worship  and  contrib- 
uted their  proportion  towards  its  support,  but  such 
spiritual  privileges  have  never  induced  them  to  allow 
their  Prayer  Books  to  grow  dusty.  One  of  the  objects 
of  this  book  is  to  increase  the  number  of  such  by  pro- 
moting the  conviction  that  nothing  will  justify  the 
abandonment  of  tlie  ancient  Catholic  Church  of  the 
English-speaking  race  for  membership  in  any  of  the 
modern  Denominations. 

Because  a  person  finds  himself  to  be  one  of  only 
two  or  three  representatives  of  the  Church  in  a  com- 
munity, he  is  not  justified  in  transferring  his  allegiance 
to  any  of  the  Denominations.  Let  him  rather  consti- 
tute himself  a  missionary.  He  can  persuade  his  breth- 
ren, if  there  be  any,  and  other  well-disposed  persons,  to 
join  him  in  the  establishment  perhaps  of  a  Sunday 
afternoon  Lay  Service ;  he  can  distribute  Prayer  Books 
and  tracts  in  which  the  claims  and  ways  of  the  Church 
are  explained  and  justified,  and  he  can  be  instrumental 
in  an  organized  effort  to  secure  at  least  the  occasional 
visit  of  a  Clergyman.  Some  of  the  most  prosperous 
parishes  and  promising  missions  of  Ohio  have  gi-own 


8 


THE   CHURCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


H' 


i:;l 


out  of  the  zealous  efforts  of  a  very  few  persons.  One  of 
our  largest  and  best  equipped  Churches  and  Sunday 
Schools  owes  its  origin  to  a  discreet  Church  worn  an. 
She  assembled  her  numerous  family  and  as  many  of  her 
neighbors  as  she  could  persuade  to  join  them  on  each 
Lord's  Day,  and  after  she  had  conducted  the  Service,  her 
husband,  who  was  not  a  communicant,  read  a  sermon 
which  she  had  selected. 

Thus,  the  fact  tliat  l|  litt  pleased  God  to  call  a 
Churc'hman  to  live  in  a  place  where  he  is  deprived  of 
priestly  ministrations,  affords  no  reason  why  he  should 
forsake  the  spiritual  mother  and  guide  of  his  youth  by 
joining  himself  with  those  whose  ancestors,  in  their  self- 
will  and  rebellion,  went  out  from  her,  and  by  the  form- 
ing of  rival  sects  did  all  in  their  power  to  realize  the 
mad  cry,  **down  with  her,  down  with  her,  even  to  the 
ground."  On  the  contrary,  such  persons  have  all  the 
more  cause  for  extraordinary  faithfulness,  since,  by 
such  a  course,  thev  mav  become  the  honored  instru- 
ments  of  planting  the  Catholic  Church  of  the  English 
race  and  establishing  "  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints  "  in  a  region  where  otherwise  these  might  remain 
unknown  or  obscured  for  generations  to  come.  Think 
of  the  inestimable  privilege  of  thus  becoming  instru- 
inental  in  establishing  a  mission  or  parish  of  the  Church 
of  Christ.  It  falls  to  the  lot  of  but  few  in  any  other 
way  to  erect  such  a  fair,  enduring  monument  to  the 
glory  of  (lod  and  their  own  memory.  The  isolated  sons 
and  daughters  of  the  Church  may  in  many  cases  at  least 
have  their  names  inscribed  upon  such  a  monument  as 
the  charter  members  of  the  Church  of  the  place  in  which 
their  lot  has  been  cast. 

It  is  often  very  easy  to  secure  this  imperishable  fame. 
The  truth  of  this  observation  might  be  abundantly 
ilustrated  out  of  the  experience  of  all  who  have  been 


INTRODUCTORY. 


9 


long  engaged  in  Church  extension  work.  The  writer 
coutd  m'^ention  a  village  where  six  years  ago  the  only 
person  interested  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  if  not  indeed 
the  only  one  who  knew  of  her  existence,  was  a  child  who, 
while  attendinir  a  seminary,  had  occasionally  accom- 
panied two  or^three  companions  to  the  Services  of  a 
neighboring  Church.  Now  the  little  village  boasts  of  a 
flourishing  mission  with  a  centrally  located  lot  and  a 
picturesque  Chapel,  paid  for,  and  in  all  time  to  come, 
whenever  the  history  of  this  Church  shall  be  rehearsed, 
the  name  of  the  school-giri  to  whom  it  owes  its  origm 

will  be  mentioned. 

If,  then,  this  book  should  fall  into  the  hands  of  some 
isolated  member  of  the  Church,  let  me  exhort  you  to  re- 
member that  "though  a  sentinel  on  the  outposts,  you 
are  still  a  member  of  that  vast  army  with  its  two  hun- 
dred Bishops,  forty  thousand  other  Clergy,  and  millions 
of  privates."  You  are  not  alone.  Though  few  of  your 
faith  are  near  you,  there  are,  in  every  portion  of  the 
globe,  millions  of  intelligent,  godly  men  and  women 
who  think  as  you  think,  love  the  same  worship  and  hold 
the  same  truths.  God  has  placed  you  where  you  are  for 
a  purpose,  perhaps  to  be  the  nucleus  of  some  future 
Clhurch,  in  which  hundreds  will  learn  her  sacred  ways. 
Stand  firm,  then,  as  a  pioneer.  Be  true  to  your  trust. 
Teach  vour  children  to  love  your  Church.  That  Church 
is  doing  a  grand,  a  glorious  work.  She  is  marching  to 
victory.  Be  faithful  at  your  post,  and  watch  unto 
prayer  I 


(► 


M 

.  I     ■        ■ 

i 


It  will  appear,  from  an  examination  of  the  table  of 
contents,  that  it  was  impossible  to  cover  the  ground 
marked  out  for  this  book  without  instituting  com- 
parisons  between   the    Episcopal   Church    and    other 


!■ 


10 


THE    CHURCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


!'•: 

!•',' 


m 


bodies  of  Ghristiaus.  Where  we  are  found  to  differ 
radically  in  matters  of  doctrine  and  government,  an 
uncompromising  effort  has  been  made  to  justify  our 
position.  But  the  uniform  endeavor  has  been  to  s[)eak 
the  truth  as  P]piscopalians  understand  it,  in  a  spirit 
of  love  and  fairness,  and  it  is  hoped  that  we  have 
nowhere  been  so  unfortunate  in  our  expression  as  to 
wound  the  feelings  of  any  who  differ  from  us,  or  to  leave 
the  impression  that  we  are  so  narrow  and  bigoted  as 
not  to  perceive  that  the  various  Denominations  of  Chris- 
tians have  done  and  are  doing  a  great  amount  of  good. 
If  it  was  said  of  one  who  followed  not  the  ** twelve," 
with  Jesus  personally  amongst  them,  "Forbid  him  not, 
for  he  that  is  not  against  us  is  for  us,"  we  must  surely 
say  it  with  far  more  emphasis  with  respect  to  those  who 
follow  not  the  American  successors  of  the  Apostles.  ' '  No 
one  of  the  Apostolic  band  upheld  the  unity  of  Christ's 
mystical  body,  the  Church,  as  St.  Paul  did,  and  he  also 
could  say,  and  let  us  say  it  with  him, '  Notwithstanding, 
every  way,  Christ  is  preached,  and  I  therein  do  rejoice, 
yea,  and  will  rejoice.'"  We  believe  that  countless  mil- 
lions will  be  in  Heaven  who  followed  not  with  us. 

But  though  we  are  aware  of  the  Christian  graces,  the 
good  works,  and  the  bright  heavenly  prospects  of  tens 
of  thousands  of  the  representatives  of  the  Roman 
Cluirch  and  non-Episcopal  Denominations,  yet  this  glad 
conviction  does  not  justify  us  in  forgetting  our  pro- 
longed, causeless,  hurtful,  and,  therefore,  sinful  divi- 
sions, and  the  consequent  obligation  to  do  what  we  can 
to  restore  the  visible  organic  unity  of  the  primitive 
Church.  We  are  indeed  all  journeying  toward  the 
Promised  Land  ;  but  how  much  better  it  would  be  for  us 
and  for  the  world  if  we  were  going  together  in  the 
straight  and  narrow  way  of  God's  appointment.  The 
fallacy  of  those  who  argue  that  "  we  are  all  engaged  iu 


IXTRODUCTORY. 


11 


the  same  work  and  seeking  the  same  Heaven,  and  after 
all  it  does  not  ma.tter  much  which  way  we  take,"  has 
been  illustrated  by  the  Mississippi  River  at  a  flood 
time.  The  water  which  remains  in  the  channel,  and  that 
which  breaks  through  the  dikes  and  tears  its  destruc- 
tive course  along,  alike  make  their  way  to  the  Gulf; 
but  it  does  make  some  difference  how  they  get  there. 
The  Church  of  God  is  often  compared  to  an  army,  and 
the  various  Denominations  are  likened  to  so  many  regi- 
ments in  that  army.  But,  as  has  frequently  been  pointed 
out,  an  army  the  regiments  of  which  held  little  or  no 
communication,  recognized  no  common  orders  or  offi- 
cers, and  had  no  concerted  plan  of  campaign,  would  be 
helpless  and  ineffective.    Such  an  undisciplined  horde 
could  only  court  defeat. 

*^  Let  us  suppose,"  says  Bishop  Coxe,  * 'that  General 
Moltke  had  said,  before  crossing  the  Rhine,  to  his  brave 
men  in  arms,  '  Soldiers,  we  are  acting  on  a  very  false 
system  of   war.    I  observe  you  all  seem   to  be  thor- 
oughly organized  as  one  grand  army,  and  that  you  are 
anxious  to  preserve,  however  you  may  be  distributed  in 
various  corps,  one  discipline,  one  common  plan  of  cam- 
paign, and  one  recognized  system  of  drill,  of  instruc- 
tions, of  subordination,  and  of  organic  force.    All  this 
is  mere  delusion.    You  have  different  tastes,  and  are  in- 
telligent enough  to  have  each  your  own  ideas  of  what  it 
is  best  to  do.    Break  up,  then,  this  vast  clumsy  organi- 
zation, and  let  us  have,  at  least,  five  or  six  different 
armies,  each  pursuing  its  own  w^ay,  and  occasionally 
firing  into  each  other,  or  pausing  for  skirmishes  be- 
tween diffei-ent   generals.    If  these  skirmishes   should 
promote  subdivisions,  and  end  in  producing  thirty  or 
forty  armies  and  guerrilla  gangs,  obviously  we  should 
all  be  the  stronger.    We  want  nothing  but  unity  of 
heart.    Be  good  Germans,  and  act  for  the  one  object  of 


f 


I  iM 


,- 


12 


THE   CHURCH    FOR   AMERICANS. 


I 


■ 


humbliiio;  the  enemies  of  Fatherland.  Yes,  I  hear  your 
cheers.  Your  hearts  are  all  right ;  now  then,  break  up 
into  your  several  gangs,  act  with  your  favorite  officers ; 
agi-ee  to  differ;  scatter,  scatter,  scatter!  That  is  the 
best  plan,  if  the  heart  is  only  true  to  the  cause.  Be  sure 
to  shake  hands  with  one  another  before  and  after  a  free 
fight  among  yourselves;  then  keep  to  your  personal 
ideas  of  a  campaig-n,  and  follow  no  leader  that  will  not 
gratify  these  convictions.  This  will  insure  success. 
Huzzah,  boys!  Now,  begone!  Helter-Skelter !  be  your 
war  cry."* 

No  separations  among  Christians  are  lawful,  though 
they  may  be  divinely  overruled  for  good,  except  such  as 
come  from  the  mere  national  divisions  of  humanity. 
All  Americans  should  be  in  an  American  Church.  There 
should  be  a  "United  Church  of  the  United  States"—" a 
Church  with  wide  freedom  in  all  minor  matters,  but 
with  Apostolic  succession  for  its  ministry,  Ecumenical 
indorsement  for  its  Creed,  and  reverent  celebration  of 
the  two  Sacraments." 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  ow  blessed  Lord  fervently 
prayed  that  w©  might  be  one,  and  that  He  hinged  the 
Christianization  of  the  world  upon  a  united  Church,  we 
feel  in  conscience  bound  to  do  what  we  can  to  convince 
all  with  w^hom,  in  any  way,  we  come  into  contact,  and 
over  whom  we  have  the  least  influence,  that  the  Anglican 
Communion,  of  which  the  American  Episcopal  Church 
is  a  part,  offers  the  only  ground  upon  which  the  reunion 
of  divided  Christendom  can  take  place.  It  has  been 
well  said:  "We  have  not,  as  a  communion,  such  a 
monopoly  of  either  piety  or  learning  in  this^  land  that 
we  can  afford  to  be  contemptuous,  even  if  that  temper 
were  ever  permissible  in  a  Christian  Church.  But  we 
have,  through  the  blessing  of  God,  the  title  deeds  of  the 
old  homestead  in  our  hands ;  we  sit  by  the  hearthstone 


INTRODUCTORY. 


13 


of  the  English-speaking  race;  and  ought  we  to  be 
blamed  for  thinking  that  if  the  family  can  be  gathered 
anywhere  in  peace,  it  must  be  here?  " 

"  O  Thou  who  didst  on  that  last  night, 

Ere  death  had  paled  Thy  brow, 
Speak  sweetly  of  love's  power  and  might, 

As  none  could  speak  but  Thou, 
Remind  Thy  little  flock,  alas! 

So  prone  to  disagree. 
That  Thy  desire  and  last  prayer  was 

For  Christian  Unity." 


I 


I  must  conclude  these  introductory  remarks  with  a 
little  further  justification  of  our  Clergy  and  a  large  per- 
centage of  the  Laity  who  have  no  hesitancy  in  doing 
what  they  can  to  persuade  the  adherents  of  other  Chris- 
tian bodies  to  come  into  the  Episcopal  Church.    To  this 
end  we  write  and  disseminate  books  such  as  this,  preach 
sermons,  converse,  and  invite  people  to  the  Services. 
Romanists  do  not  blame  us  for  this  because,  as  a  rule, 
they  are  also  avowed  proselyters.    But  Denomination- 
alists  often  represent  that  we  are  guilty  of  something 
akin  to  robbery, in  fact  they  plainly  call  it  "sheep  steal- 
ing."   They  represent  our  conduct  as  being,  if  not  abso- 
lutely sinful,  at  least  unworthy  of  any  Christian  man  or 
woman.    We  protest  that  this  representation  is  wholly 
unjustified.    Christian  Denominations  have  just  as  much 
right  to  proselyte  as  political  parties.    If  a  Prohibit 
tionist  has  no  hesitancy  in  winning  over  a  Republican 
or  Democrat  we  do  not  see  why  Methodists  should  have 
any  scruples  about  taking  in  Presbyterians  or  Baptists 
when  they  have  an  opportunity.    And  if  they  can  win 
back  the  adherents  of  the  numerous  bodies  who  at  one 
time  or  another  went  out  from  themselves,  it  is  even 


111 


i 

I 


14 


THE   CHURCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


8i 


I'l  I 


harder  to  conceive  upon  what  grounds  they  can  be 
justly  condemned. 

But  whether  the  making;  of  inroads  one  upon  the 
other  by  rival  Denominations  is  justifiable  or  not,  we 
cannot  allow  those  who  fault  us  to  forget  that  if  they 
and  their  ancestors  had  all  along  been  guiltless,  the 
great  majority  of  Denominationalists  would  now  be  in 
the  Episcopal  Church.    When  the  tide  was  flowing  from 
the  Church,  Congregationalists,  I'resbyterians  and  Meth- 
odists did  not  condemn  proselyting,  but  now  that  the  re- 
action has  set  in  and  the  returning  waves  are  bringing 
tens  of  thousands  from  them  to  our  shores,  they  have 
suddenly  discovered  that  it  is  a  very  discreditable  busi- 
ness.    We  contend,  however,  that  if  the  law  of  charity 
and  comity  be  observed,  an  Episcopalian  has  a  perfect 
right  to   make  as  many  converts  to   his   Church  as 
possible.    In  fact  the  majority  of  us  are  obliged  bv  our 
convictions  to  do  so,  for  we  believe  that  tliere  is*^  only 
one  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ,  and  that 
the  various  branches  of  the  Anglican  Communion  in 
their  respective  countries  are  entitled  to  the  exclusive 
.allegiance  and  support  of  the  English  speaking  popu- 
lation.   Moreover,    we   hold   that    sectarianism   is  a 
great  evil.    This  being  the  case,  an  Episcopalian  who  is 
not  a  proselyter  would  be  as  inconsistent  as  a  Deuomi- 
uationalist  who  is  such. 


11 


The  Church  for  American.s, 


LECTURE  I. 

CHURCh    ynEA\BERSniP. 

I.     Obligations  to  Belong  to  Church. 
II.     The  Choice  of  a  Church. 


ti 


I  will  not  cease  from  mental  strife, 
Nor  shall  my  sword  sleep  in  my  hand, 

Till  we  have  built  Jerusalem 
In  this  our  green  and  pleasant  land." 


(15> 


1 

Id 

« 

ft' 


i 


I* 


n'« 


^ 


AUTHORITIES. 


CiiAPiN,  Primitive  Church. 

Chapman,  Sermons  on  the  Church. 

Churton,  Bp.,  The  Missionary's  Foundation  of  Doctrine. 

CusHMAN,  Doctrine  and  Duty. 

Garnier,  Canon,  A  First  Book  on  Church  Principles. 

Gladstone,  Church  Principles  Considered  in  Their  Results. 

GouLBURN,  Dean,  The  Holy  Catholic  Church. 

Huntington,  The  Church  Idea. 

Labagh,  Theoklesia. 

Lay,  Bp.,  Studies  in  the  Church. 

Leonard,  Bp.,  A  Brief  History  of  the  Christian  Church, 

OxoNiENsis,  Komanism,  Protestantism,  Anglicanism. 

Palmer,  Treatise  on  the  Church.    (2  vols.) 

Row,  Apostolic  Christianity. 

Sadler,  Church  Doctrine,  Bible  Truth. 

West,  Tracts  on  Church  Principles. 

Wilson,  The  Church  Identified. 


PAMPHLETS. 


Drummond,  The  City  Without  a  Church. 
Drummond,  The  Programme  of  Christianity. 
Ewer,  What  Is  the  Anglican  Church  ? 
Miller,  My  Parish  Note-Book. 
Thompson,  Bp.,  First  Principles. 
Woodhouse,  What  Is  the  Church  7 


(U) 


CHURCH   MEMBERSHIP. 


JL« 


¥ 


■I' 


1    -J,.!  : 


if 


III 


OBLIGATIONS  TO  CHURCH  MEMBERSHIP. 

THERE  are  three  principal  reasons  why  every  per- 
son who  hears  the  Gospel  of  Christ  should 
belong  to  His  Church.  The  first  grows  out  of 
the  duty  of  obedience.  The  Church  is  the  Kingdom  of 
Christ,  and  all  outside  of  it  is  the  Kingdom  of  Satan. 
We  must,  in  the  long  run,  give  our  undivided  alle- 
giance to  either  one  or  the  other  of  these  princes.  We 
cannot  adhere  to  both.  "No  man  can  serve  two  mas- 
ters, for  either  he  will  hate  the  one  and  love  the  other ; 
or  else  he  will  hold  to  the  one,  and  despise  the  other. 
Ye  cannot  serve  God  and  Mammon."  Those  who  re- 
main out  of  the  Church,  and  yet  try  to  follow  the 
example  and  precepts  of  Christ,  are  trying  to  please  two 
masters.  As  a  rule  which  holds,  notwithstanding 
the  comparatively  few  exceptions  that  we  may  know 
of,  such  men  fail.  The  majority  of  non  church  mem- 
bers are  not  the  servants  of  Christ.  Speaking  gen- 
erally, men  out  of  His  Church  do  no  more  serve  Him 
than  they  who  fight  in  the  enemies'  ranks  help  their 
country.  The  Kingdom  of  Christ  and  the  world  are 
in  deadly  conflict  for  the   mastery.     How  then   can 

C.A.-2  (17) 


1! 


18 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


ifli 


'I 


i 


\ 


'Ml 


anyoDe  who  professes  to  be  a  loyal  servant  of  Christ, 
stand  aloof  from  His  Church,  which  is  His  Kinsr- 
dom? 

^  In  our  day  a  great  many  people  acknowledge  the 
duty  of  making  the  example  and  precepts  of  Christ 
their  rule  of  life,  but  deny  that  they  are  under  any 
obligation  to  become  Church  members.  They  fail  to 
see  that  this  is  required  of  them.  *' Millions  in  Amer- 
ica," says  Bishop  Coxe,  "live  and  die  in  the  easy  per- 
suasion, from  which  no  trumf)et  of  united  testimony 
rouses  them,  that  they  are  rather  the  better  for  'read- 
ing their  Bibles'  and  'leading  moral  Hves,'  while  not 
'making  any  profession  of  religion,'  as  they  term  it.. 
Inverted  Pharisaism  of  American  inorganic  Chris- 
tianity! They  make  a  merit  of  not  obeying,  and  of 
being  so  good  without  the  means  of  grace."  Surely 
such  have  not  asked  themselves  the  question :  Why 
did  Christ  found  a  Church,  and  why  did  He  say  so 
much  about  it?  Was  it  not  manifestly  that  men 
might  be  separated  from  the  Kingdom  of  Satan,  and 
be  identified  with  Him? 

It  is  well  known  that  all  great  prophets  and  re- 
formers have  had  some  particular  message  which  has, 
by  constant  reiteration,  crystallized  into  a  word  or 
phrase.  With  Moses  it  was  law ;  with  Confucius,  mo- 
rality; with  Buddha,  renunciation;  with  Mohammed, 
God;  with  Socrates,  soul.  With  the  Master  it  was 
"the  Kingdom  of  God."  Says  Professor  Drummond: 
"Christ's  great  word  was  'the  Kingdom  of  God.'  One 
hundred  times  it  occurs  in  the  Gospels.  When  He 
preached  He  had  almost  always  this  for  a  text.  His 
sermons  were  explanations  of  the  aims  of  His  society. 
of  the  different  things  it  was  like,  of  whom  its  mem- 
bership consisted,  what  they  were  to  do  or  to  be  or 
not  to  do  or  to  be.    And  even  when  He  does  not  use 


OBLIGATIONS    TO    CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


19 


I  ^^ 


the  word,  it  is  easy  to  see  that  all  He  said  and  did  had 
reference  to  this." 

A  little  reflection,  therefore,  must  convince  all  that 
the  founding  of  the  Church  by  Christ,  or  by  His  repre- 
sentatives, the  Apostles,  and  the  importance  which  He 
attaches  to  it,  make  identification  with  it  of  universal 
obligation.  The  prevailing  demand  is  for  a  preaching 
^f  the  Gospel  with  the  Church  left  out,  or  at  least  put 
far  in  the  background.  Surely  the  many  who,  in  defer- 
ence to  popular  sentiment,  have  tried  to  preach  such  a 
Gospel,  have  not  preached  Christ's  Gospel,  for  it  dwells 
more  on  the  Church  than  upon  any  other  subject. 

Though  the  duty  of  membership  may  be  clearly  in- 
ferred from  the  fact  that  Christ  founded  a  Church  and 
made  it  the  burden  of  His  discourses,  we  are  not  left 
without  explicit  injunctions  requiring  identification 
with  His  Kingdom.  For  every  command  to  receive 
Christian  Baptism  is  really  a  positive  injunction  to  be- 
long to  the  Church.  Baptism  is  the  door  to  the  Church. 
It  is  the  Sacrament  of  initiation.  A  person  cannot  re- 
ceive it  without  becoming  a  member  of  the  Church. 
Therefore,  when  our  Lord  said,  "  Go  ye  and  teach  all  na- 
tions, baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of 
the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  it  is  as  if  He  had  said, 
Go  ye  into  all  the  world  and  preach  the  Gospel,  making 
whosoever  accepts  it  a  member  of  My  Church.  Noth- 
ing can  be  clearer  than  that  in  Apostolic  days  none  who 
stood  aloof  from  the  Church  were  regarded  as  having 
received  the  Gospel.  Non  church  members  were  looked 
upon  as  heathen.  The  unbaptized  stood  in  the  same 
relation  to  Christianity  as  the  uncircumcised  did  to  Ju- 
daism. It  must  be  evident  to  all  that  if  others  are 
commanded  to  see  to  it  that  we  are  identified  with  the 
Kingdom  of  Christ  by  Baptism,  it  is  equivalent  to  a 
command  that  we  should  become  Church  members. 


I   ,;    ,1 


1.. 


f 


!:!• 


CHUECH    MEMBERSHIP. 


M 


1. 


I'! 


•'>!( 


I      I 

'ii    ', 


The  first  and  most  important  step  in  the  way  of 
obedience  to  Christ  is,  therefore,  Church  membership. 
No  man,  who  has  heard  the  Gospel  and  acknowledges 
the  claims  of  Christ  to  his  allegiance,  can  discharge  his 
duty  while  remaining  outside  the  Church.  The  first 
thing  to  be  done  by  him  who  would  follow  Christ  is  to 
transfer  his  allegiance  from  the  prince  of  this  world  to 
the  Divine  Lord  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven.  It  is  the 
height  of  absurdity  for  a  man  to  claim  that  he  can  be 
as  good  a  Christian  while  outside  of  the  Church  as  he 
could  be  within  it.  As  well  miglit  a  foreigner  pretend 
that  he  can  be  as  good  an  American  citizen  without 
naturalization  as  with  it.  Such  a  man  is  not  an  Ameri- 
can at  all.  Neither  is  a  non  church  member,  strictly 
speaking,  a  Christian. 

A  good  story  is  told  by  a  distinguished  Presbyterian 
clergyman,  about  a  little  girl  who  was  talking  to  her 
grandfather.  The  old  gentleman  had  been  imparting 
some  advice,  suitable  to  the  tender  years  of  his  grand- 
child. Finally  the  latter  put  the  question :  "  Grandpa, 
are  you  a  Christian  ?  "  ^'Yes,  my  dear,  I  hope  I  am.'' 
"What  Church  do  you  belong  to,  grandpa?"  "Oh,  I 
belong  to  the  Church  of  Christ."  "But  what  is  that? 
Are  you  a  member  of  the  same  Church  that  mamma 
and  I  are— the  Episcopal  Church?"  "No,  my  dear,  I 
am  not  an  Episcopalian."  "Are  you  a  Presbyterian, 
then?"  "No,  I  am  not  a  Presbyterian."  "Are  you  a 
Baptist,  then?"  "No."  "Are you  a  Methodist?"  "No, 
dear;  I  don't  belong  to  any  of  the  churches."  After  a 
pause,  in  which  the  little  one  was  thinking  it  all  over, 
she  turned  her  face  up  to  her  grandfather's  and  said : 
"  Well,  grandpapa,  if  I  were  you,  I  would  try  and  get  in 
somewhere.''  Until  modern  times  no  one  claimed  to  be 
a  Christian,  or  was  regarded  as  such,  who  did  not  "get 
in  somewhere." 


( ■ 


OBLIGATIONS   TO    CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


21 


Again,  those  who  are  standing  aloof  from  the  Church 

shouTd  enter  out  of  consideration  for  their  own  highest 

welfare.    Salvation  is  made  by  our  Lord  Himself  to 

depend  upon  the  confession  of  Him.    "  Whosoever  shall 

confess  me  before  men,  him  Avill  I  confess  also  before  my 

Father,  which  is  in  heaven ;  but  whosoever  shall  deny 

me  before  men,  him  will  I  also  deny  before  my  Father, 

which  is  in  heaven."    Now  there  is  no  way  in  which  a 

person  can  make  an  open    unreserved  confession    of 

Christ  except  by  the  renunciation  of  the  world  for  the 

Church.     This,  according  to  our  Lord's  own  appoints 

roent,  must  bo  done  in  Holy  Baptism.    "  Except  a  man 

be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into 

the  Kingdom  of  God."    And  the  Kingdom  of  God  here 

does  not  mean  that  Heaven  which  we  hope  to  attain 

after  this  life,  but  the  Church  which  Christ  founded  when 

upon  earth.    It  is,  therefore,  the  same  as  if  He  had  said. 

Unless  you  belong  to  the  Church,  you  cannot  attain  to 

Gospel  Salvation. 

I  cannot  do  better  than  to  quote  in  this  connection 
the  weighty  words  of  Bishop  Pearson:  "We  read  at 
the  first  that  the  Lord  added  daily  to  the  Church  such 
as  should  be  saved ;  and  what  was  then  daily  done  hath 
been  done  since  continually.  Christ  never  appointed 
two  ways  to  Heaven,  nor  did  He  build  a  Church  to  save 
some  and  make  another  institution  for  other  men's 
salvation.  There  is  none  other  name  under  Heaven 
given  among  men,  whereby  we  must  be  saved,  but  the 
name  of  Jesus,  and  that  name  is  no  otherwise  given 
under  Heaven  than  in  the  Church.  As  none  were  saved 
from  the  deluge  but  such  as  were  within  the  ark  of 
Noah,  framed  for  their  reception  by  the  command  of 
God;  as  none  of  the  firstborn  of  Egypt  lived,  but  such 
as  were  within  those  habitations  whose  doorposts 
were   sprinkled    with   blood  by   the   appointment-  of 


It 


4 


22 


CHURCH     MEMBERSHIP. 


OBLIGATIONS    TO    CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


23 


I 


,1 


J' 


"J 


God  for  tlieir  preservation ;  as  none  of  the  inhabitants 
of  Jericho  could  escape  the  fire  or  sword  but  such  as 
were  within  the  house  of  Rahab,  for  whose  protec- 
tion a  covenant  was  made,  so  none  shall  ever  escape 
the  anger  of  God  which  belong  not  to  the  Church  of 
God/' 

As  some   one  has   pointed   out,    "The  nineteenth 
feentury  needs  to  be  told,  as  by  another  John  Baptist, 
crying,  not  in  the  wilderness,  but  throughout  all  the 
I  American  continent,  that  not  to  confess  Christ  openly, 
I  that  is,  not  to  accept  His  covenant  in  the  institution 
He  has   provided,   is   virtually  to  deny  Him.     How 
I  very  comfortable  it  would  have  been  had  this  Amer- 
ican  gospel  been  taught   in  the   first   century:     'Be 
|good,   read  your  Bibles,  and  God  will  not  ask  you 
whether  or  not  you  belong  to  Church.'    That  would 
just  have  suited  Demas,  who  loved  this  present  world 
and  had  no  idea  of  coming  out  of  it  and  being  sep- 
arate.    He  would  have  lived  and  died,  'respecting  re- 
ligion,' as  the  phrase  is,  but  chiefly  consoled  by  that 
blessed  doctrine,  '  It  makes  no  difference  about  exter- 
nals, provided  only  the  heart  is  right.'    'Precisely  so,' 
brother  Demas  would  have  said;    'I  trust  my  "heart 
is  all  right,  but  I've  no  trust  in  ordinances.'    To  come 
out  and  be  baptized  and  to  receive  the  laying  on  of 
hands,  and  to  frequent  the  Lord's  Supper,  he  would 
have   argued,  'are  well  enough  for  those  who  are  so 
superstitious.     But  stoning   by  the  Jews  is  uncom- 
fortable ;  beheading  and  other  tortures  of  the  Romans 
involve  great  personal  sacrifices.    I  can  '  believe  in  my 
heart,'  you  know,  without  confessing  with  my  mouth, 
or  submitting  to  those  outward  things  which  carnal 
minds  make  so  much  of.   Yes,  I've  always  been  consoled 
by  those  spiritual  views  of  the  Gospel  which  teach  me 
to  be  a  good  Christian  in  my  heart,  without  submitting 


I 


to  any  formal  system,  subversive  as  such  systems  must 
be  of  our  Christian  liberty." 

Moreover,  the  good  of  others  should  move  non 
church  members  to  identify  themselves  with  the  Church. 
The  continuation  and  development  of  our  civilization 
depend  upon  the  Church  which  gave  it  birth,  and  has 
brought  it  to  its  present  stage  of  perfection.  It  is 
wrong  for  any  man  or  woman  to  pursue  a  course  which 
if  universally  adopted  would  make  the  world  worse  in- 
stead of  better.  If  all  were  from  this  time  on  to  follow 
the  example  of  the  non  church  members  who  are  to  be 
found  in  every  community,  the  Christian  civilization,  in 
every  respect,  even  in  its  present  imperfect  state,  the 
best  that  the  world  has  ever  seen,  would  rapidly  decline, 
and  a  generation  or  two  would  suffice  to  bring  about 
its  extinction.  History  plainly  teaches  that  no  civiliza- 
tion long  survives  the  abandonment  of  the  religion 
upon  which  it  is  founded.  Up  to  this  time  all  civiliza- 
tions  have  had  some  religion  for  their  basis.  Chris- 
tianity is  the  foundation  -of  our  civilization. 

So  long  as  the  Greeks  and  Romans  were  faithful  in 
the  service  of  their  gods,  their  magnificent  civilizations 
advanced  to  higher  stages  of  perfection,  but  when  they 
began  to  forsake  their  temples  a.  retrogression  com- 
menced which  in  its  degree  kept  pace  almost  exactly 
with  the  progress  of  the  national  apostasy.  History 
would  certainly  repeat  itself  in  the  case  of  our  civiliza- 
tion, if  all  were  to  imitate  the  example  of  non  church 
members.  In  addition,  therefore,  to  the  duty  of  obedi- 
ence to  Christ  and  consideration  for  your  own  highest 
welfare,  the  good  of  the  worid,  in  so  far  as  it  depends 
upon  the  perpetuity  and  development  of  our  civiliza- 
tion, requires  you  to  identify  yourself  with  the  Church. 
Duty  to  Christ,  to  yourself,  and  to  every  human  being 
in  the^worid,  makes  it  incumbent  upon  you  to  belong  to 


11 


V. 


CBITRCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


fie  diurdi.  **If,"  to  borrow  tlie  burning  words  of  an- 
other, "you  know  anything-  better,  live  for  it;  if  not,  in 
the  name  of  God  and  of  humanity,  carry  out  Christ's 
plan  "  by  the  identification  of  yourself  with  his  Kingdom. 


It  is  impossible  for  the  non  church  member  to  justify 
his  position.  It  is  not  sufficient  that  he  should  be  able 
to  say  truthfully :  "1  follow  the  example  and  precepts 
of  Christ  as  closely  as  the  majority  of  Church  members 
who  are  within  the  circle  of  my  acquaintance."  The 
Church,  which  was  founded  for  the  salvation  of  the  world, 
would  cease  to  exist  if  all  followed  your  example,  and 
but  for  the  Church  and  its  impei-fect,  sinful  members, 
towards  whom  you  are  ever  pointing  the  finger  of  criti- 
cism, you  would  know  little,  and  care  less,  about  Christ. 

To  quote  Professor  Drummond  again:  "Here  and 
there  an  unchurched  soul  may  stir  the  multitudes  to 
lofty  deeds;  isolated  men,  strong  enough  to  preserve 
their  souls  apart  from  the  Church,  but  shortsighted 
enough  perhaps  to  fail  to  see  that  others  cannot,  may 
set  high  examples  and  stimulate  to  national  reforms. 
But  for  the  rank  and  file  of  us,  made  of  such  stuff  as  we 
are  made  of,  the  steady  pressure  of  fixed  institutions, 
the  regular  diet  of  a  common  worship,  and  the  educa- 
tion  of  public  Christian  teaching,  are  too  obvious  safe- 
guards  of  scriptural  culture  to  be  set  aside." 

Even  Renan,  one  of  the  most  gifted  of  modern 
French  skeptics,  declares  it  to  be  his  conviction  that, 
"beyond  the  family  and  outside  the  state  man  has 
need  of  the  Church.  Civil  society,  whether  it  calls  itself 
a  commune,  a  canton,  or  a  province,  a  state  or  a 
Fatherland,  has  many  duties  towards  the  improve- 
ment of  the  individual;  but  what  it  does  is  necessarily 
Umited.    The  family  ought  to  do  raiipfe  more,  but'  often 


OBLIGATIONS   TO    CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


25 


it  is  insufficient.  Sometimes  it  is  wanting  altogether. 
The  association  created  in  the  name  of  moral  principle 
can  alone  give  to  every  man  coming  into  this  world,  a 
bond  which  unites  him  to  the  past,  duties  as  to  the  fu- 
ture, examples  to  follow,  a  heritage  to  receive  and  to 
transmit,  and  a  tradition  of  devotion  to  continue." 

Nor  can  a  non  church  member  justify  his  position  by 
the  opposite   plea,  so  frequently  urged— "I    am   not 
good  enough  to  belong  to  Church."    Christ  came  to 
save  sinners.     He  said:    "They  that  be  whole  have 
no  need  of  a  physician."    The  Church  would  collapse 
to-day  if  goodness  and  worthiness  were  made  conditions 
of  membership.    In  the  Litany  all,  even  those  who  have 
attained   the   greatest   degree    of    Christlikeness,  are 
taught  to  pray,  "Have  mercy  upon  us  miserable  sin- 
ners."   Whether  in  or  out  of  the  Church  every  member 
of  the  human  race  is  a  sinner.    We  are  of  course  aware 
that  some  deny  that  they  are  sinners.    My  attention 
has  recently  been  called  to  an  instance.    In  a  sermon 
preached  at  one  of  our  mission  stations  I  had  occasion 
to  refer  to  the  fact  that  the  Church  teaches  all,  not  ex- 
cepting the  most  venerable  and  godly,  to  look  upon 
themselves  as  sinful  men  and  women.    The  lay  reader 
afterwards  told  me  that  he  was  glad  for  that  passage 
in  my  sermon,  because  on  the  Sunday  before,  during  the 
reading  of  the  litany,  a  woman  had  abruptly  left  the 
Church  in  manifest  displeasure  and  that  one  who  after- 
waT*d  made  inquiry  concerning  the  ground  of  her  excep- 
tion to  the  Service  was  told :    "I  will  have  nothing  to 
do  with  a  Church  that  obliges  all  her  worshipers,  with- 
out distinction,  to  confess  and  acknowledge  that  they 
are  sinners.    I  was  converted  only  a  few  weeks  ago,  and 
am  not  a  sinner."    Of  course  such  a  person  cannot  be 
an  Episcopalian  nor  a  member  of  any  branch  of  the 
Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  which  is  exclusively  for  sinners. 


All' 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


II 


The  man  of  whom  one  of  our  missionary  Bishops 
tells  had  a  truer  appreciation  of  his  real  condition. 
Upon  going  to  a  mining  village  of  his  jurisdiction,  where 
the  Services  of  the  Church  had  never  been  held,  the 
Bishop  inquired  of  a  person  whom  he  met  at  the  board- 
ing house  whether  or  not  there  were  any  members  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  camp.  *'  Why,  yes,''  said  he, 
"that  is  my  Church,  and  I  am  glad  you  have  come." 
The  Bishop  expressed  his  gratification  at  running 
across  an  interested  person  so  soon  and  requested  his 
help  in  securing  a  hall  and  making  the  arrangements 
for  the  initiatory  Service.  He  found  the  miner  to  be  a 
cheerful  and  efficient  helper,  taking  everything  into  his 
own  hands.  When  the  hour  of  Service  arrived  he  con- 
ducted the  Bishop  to  a  billiard  hall,  where  a  good  sized 
congregation  of  miners  had  assembled.  The  Service 
w^as  quite  satisfactory,  considering  the  incongruous 
surroundings,  there  being  some  half  dozen  Churchmen 
present  who  read  the  responses.  But  the  Bishop  no- 
ticed with  surprise  that  his  zealous  helper  could  not 
handle  the  Prayer  Book,  and  did  not  even  conform  to 
the  customary  postures.  So,  after  returning  to  the 
house,  he  naturally  made  some  inquiries  of  his  friend. 
"Did  you,  Mr. ,  say  that  you  were  an  Episcopa- 
lian?'' "Yes,  sir,  that  is  my  religion."  "Where  were 
you  confirmed  ?  "  He  did  not  seem  to  understand  what 
was  meant.  After  the  Bishop's  explanation  of  the  rite 
he  replied :  "  Oh,  I  never  had  that  done  to  me."  "  Where 
were  you  baptized?"  "I  never  was  baptized."  "In- 
deed," said  the  astonished  Bishop.  "How  is  it  then 
that  you  told  me  that  you  were  a  member  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church?"    "Well,  parson,  when  I  was  at " 

naming  a  mining  camp  in  an  adjoining  Territory,  "one 
of  your  kind  of  preachers  came  along  and  held  a  meet- 
ing in  the  billiard  hall.    I  was  there,  and  when  I  heard 


OBLIGATIONS    TO    CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


27 


':,  I  \ 


them  say,  '  We  have  left  undone  those  things  which  we 
ought  to  have  done  and  we  have  done  those  things  which 
we  ought  not  to  have  done,'  I  said,  'that  hits  me  ex- 
actly, I  am  one  of  them  kind  of  Christians,'  and  that  is 
why  I  say  that  I  am  an  *  Episcopal ; '  and  parson,  if 
you  think  it  necessary,  I  want  them  things  that  you 
were  a  telling  about  done  to  me  when  you  come  again." 
Strange  as  it  may  seem  to  many,  this  man  rather 
than  that  deluded  woman  had  the  true  idea.    His  only 
title  to  Church  membership  was  the  recognition  of  the 
fact  that  he  was  a  sinner,  both  by  commission  and 
omission,  and  a  manifest  desire  to  do  better.    Of  course 
the  Bishop,  after  due  instruction,  would  baptize,  con- 
firm and  admit  him  to  the  Holy  Communion.    It  is  sur- 
passingly strange  that  men  and  women  who  have  heard 
the  Gospel  all  their  lives,  should  still  suppose  that  none 
ought  to  come  to  Baptism  or  Confirmation  or  the  Holy 
Communion  who  are  not  prepared  to  stand  £ind  make 
the  Pharisee's  profession  of  religion—"  God,  I  thank 
Thee  that  I  am  not  as  other  men  are.    I  am  converted. 
I  am  not  a  sinner."    But,  as  all  are  sinners,  and  those 
who  say  they  are  not,  deceive  themselves  and  the  truth 
is  not  in  them,  the  salvation  of  the  world  depends  upon 
the  sinners  that  are  in  the  Church.    They  are  the  salt  of 
the  earth  without  which  all  would  perish.    Not  that  a 
bad  man  in  the  Church  is  more  pleasing  to  God  and  has 
brighter  prospects  of  heaven  than  a  good  man  outside, 
but  that  the  place  for  all  who  would  serve  Christ  is 
iuside. 


Some  imagine  that  by  remaining  non  church  mem- 
bers they  escape  the  responsibilities  of  professing  Chris- 
tians. But  this  is  by  no  means  the  case.  The  Gos- 
pel makes  identification  with  the  Kingdom  of  Christ 


in 


28 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


obligatory  upon  every  man  and  woman,  and  refusal  to 
fulfill  this  obligation  in  no  degree  lessens  responsibility ; 
for  the  Gospel  rule  of  life  is  binding  upon  all  alike.  In 
Christian  lands,  such  as  ours,  Church  members  and  non 
church  members  are  under  one  and  the  same  law.  In 
that  great  day  when  all  must  give  a  strict  account  of 
the  deeds  done  in  the  body,  we  shall  not  be  judged  by 
different  standards. 

As  Bishop  Hugh  Miller  Thompson  says:  *  It  is  one 
of  the  prevailing  delusions  and  one,  we  fear,  which  the 
common  pulpit  seldom  reaches,  to  suppose  that  a  man 
is  free  to  accept  or  refuse  the  responsibilities  of  the 
Christian  life — that  'the  professingof  Christianity 'is  the 
taking  up  of  new  and  quite  voluntary  duties.  We  dis- 
tinctly write  it  down  a  delusion ;  and  such  a  shallow  de- 
lusion that  it  will  stand  no  test.  It  is  a  flat  contradic- 
tion of  human  life,  and  of  the  facts  of  human  life  that 
stare  us  all  in  the  face.  The  profession  of  Christ  is  not 
the  taking  up  of  a  single  duty  which  is  not  binding  on 
every  man  already,  at  least  in  lands  like  this.  The 
baptized  man  has  bound  himself  to  nothing  which  is 
not  on  the  unbaptized  man  as  well.  The  communicant 
is  measured  by  no  rule  which  is  not  used  righteously 
also  for  the  noncommunicant.  There  are  not  two 
classes  of  people  in  a  Christian  country,  under  two  dif- 
ferent laws— the  *  professors '  under  one,  and  the  '  non- 
professors '  under  another.  By  God's  divine  ordering 
of  human  life,  we  are  elected  to  Christianity.  Why,  we 
cannot  tell.  It  is  His  *good  pleasure.'  It  is  the  fact, 
that  is  all  we  know  about  it,  and  all  that,  as  sensible 
people  we  should  care  to  know.  Our  ])lain  business  is 
to  '  make  the  election  sure.* " 

Let  none,  therefore,  stand  aloof  from  the  Church, 
either  upon  the  pharisaical  plea  of  righteousness,  or 
upon  the  publican's  plea  of  sinfulness,  but  let  all  do 


'* 


THE   CHOICE    OP    A    CHURCH. 


29 


their  duty  to  Christ,  to  themselves  and  to  the  world,  by 
becoming  faithful,  humble,  unostentatious,  and,  so  far 
as  possible,  consistent  members  of  the  Church. 

II. 

THE  CHOICE  OF  A  CHURCH. 

IF  we  only  get  to  Heaven,"  says  a  dear  old  lady, 
in  her  arm-chair,  her  face  beaming  with  good  na- 
ture and  kindly  Christian  feeling,  which  we  would 
not  rudely  violate  for  the  world:  ''If  we  only  get  to 
Heaven,  it  will  never  be  asked  by  what  road  we  came." 
We  trust  that  the  tranquillity  and  radiancy  of  the 
lovely  creatures,  of  whom  this  good  woman  is  a  repre- 
sentative, will  not  be  too  much  disturbed  or  obscured  if, 
in  accordance  with  our  sense  of  duty,  we  try  to  make  it 
appear  that  more  thought  and  care  than  is  customary 
should  be  exercised  in  the  selection  of  a  Church  in  which 
to  become  a  member.   Usually  a  person  when  he  has  per- 
ceived the  duty  of  confessing  Christ  by  identification  with 
His  Church  and  has  made  up  his  mind  to  discharge  it, 
feels  at  liberty  to  unite  with  that  Denomination  whicl^ 
may  chance  to  be  his  preference.    This  in  the  majority^ 
of  cases  is  determined  by  some  accident  of  circumstan- 
ces and  environment,  as,  for  instance,  the  Church  rela-| 
tionship  of  parents  and  friends,  the  size  of  the  Denomi- 
nation, its  social  status  in  that  particular  place,  or  its 
advantages  from  a  business  point  of  view.  / 

Now  there  is  nothing  wrong  about  this,  if  the  assump- 
tion that  we  are  free  to  follow  natural  preference  in  th*y 
matter  of  Church  membership  can  be  supported ;  for  tak-  j 
ing  this  freedom  for  granted,  why  should  not  a  man  / 
in  the  choice  of  a  Church,  as  in  other  affairs  of  life, 
act  with  reference  to  those  who  are  near  and  dear  to  I 
him  and  to  the  furtherance  of  his  social  and  commercial  \ 


J   ' 


Pf 


»'./  ^l 


r 


lis 

It 

V 


f| 


111  < 
til 


"'i  j 


30 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


/ 


Interests?  But  a  moment's  reflection  will  convince  all 
thoughtful  persons  that  we  are  not  in  the  enjoyment  of 
this  assumed  liberty.  We  are  under  a  law  that  requires 
US  in  this,  as  in  all  matters  of  importance,  to  be  guided 
by  principle,  not  by  preference.  The  conscience  of  all 
will  bear  witness  to  the  truth  of  the  assertion  that  a 
man,  in  the  choice  of  a  profession  or  business,  should  be 
influenced  not  by  his  inclinations,  but  by  the  prospect 
of  service  to  God  and  man.  We  may  imagine  a  young 
man  with  life  before  him  strongly  inclined  to  the  profes- 
sion of  the  law  or  of  medicine,  although  he  is  thorough- 
ly convinced  that  the  need  for  him  is  greater,  and  that 
lie  would  be  more  useful,  in  the  ministry.  In  such  and 
all  analogous  cases,  a  person  is  not  at  liberty  to  follow 
his  preference.  Duty  to  God  and  man  lays  upon  him 
the  obligation  of  denying  himself  and  of  taking  up  his 
cross  and  following  Jesus. 

The  duty  of  such  a  course  is  quite  as  apparent  in  the 
choice  of  Church  relationship.  If  God  were  equally 
pleased,  and  if  our  opportunities  for  usefulness  were  the 
same,  no  matter  what  body  of  Christians  we  join,  then 
indeed  we  might  follow  preference,  for  there  would  be  no 
principle  at  stake.  But  would  God  be  equally  pleased, 
and  would  our  opportunities  for  usefulness  be  the  same? 
These  are  questions  which  should  be  candidly  and  con- 
scientiously considered  by  every  non  church  member  who 
has  made  up  his  mind  to  do  his  duty,  and  equally  so  by 
any  who,  without  a  proper  understanding  of  the  claims 
of  this  subject  upon  his  thoughtful  attention  ,has  already 
united  with  some  one  of  the  numerous  religious  bodies 
about  us. 

There  is  a  great  advantage  in  the  choosing  of  a 
Church  from  principle  rather  than  preference;  for,  be- 
sides promoting  self-respect  and  contentment,  it  enables 
one  to  give  a  manly  and  thoughtful  reason  for  his  choice. 


I 


THE   CHOICE    OF   A    CHURCH. 


31 


A  person  who  is  known  to  entertain  a  deep-seated  and 
rational  conviction  that  the  Church  with  which  he  is 
identified  has  superior  claims  to  his  allegiance,  will  al- 
ways have  an  influence  over  those  who  have  been  guided 
by  mere  preference  or  circumstances  in  the  choice  of 
their  Church  relationship.  This  is  illustrated  by  an  an- 
ecdote  told  of  a  parishioner  by  one  of  our  Clergy.  A  well- 
instructed  young  woman  of  his  Church  married  a  Denomi- 
nationalist.  Upon  returning  home  for  a  visit  a  year 
or  so  later,  her  old  pastor  inquired,  "  How  about  Church 
attendance?  You  go  with  your  husband,  I  presume?  " 
*'0h,  no,he  goeswith  me,"  washerreply.  "HisChurch, 
he.said,  was  the  Church  of  his  choice.  But  mine,  said  I, 
of  my  principle.  '  Preference  must  yield  to  principle, '  said 
my  good  man;  and  he  always  goes  to  Church  with  me.'' 

We  believe  that  it  is  God's  will  that  we  should  belong 
to  a  branch  of  the  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  of  Christ,  spoken  of  in  the  ancient  Creeds.  No 
other  organization  can  make  good  a  Divine  claim  to  the 
allegiance  of  any  man  or  woman .  We  contend  also,  that 
not  only  are  we  under  no  moral  obligation  to  belong  to 
an  un-Catholic  and  un-Apostolic  Christian  body,  but 
rather  obliged  not  to  belong  to  such,  since  our  doing  so 
would  tend  to  destroy  the  unity  of  Christ's  Kingdom, 
and  hinder  His  holy  conquest  of  the  world.  It  may  be 
a  good  thing  for  a  man  to  found  a  new  fraternity,  or  to 
become  a  member  of  human  societies,  such  as  the  Ma- 
sons,  Odd  Fellows,  or  Knights  of  Pythias,  but  it  is 
wrong  for  him  to  establish,  or  to  identify  himself  with, 
a  human  church. 

But  since  tbere  are  many  bodies  of  Christians,  each 
claiming  to  be  a  little  more  according  to  the  mind 
of  Christ  and  the  Apostles  than  any  of  its  rivals,  it 
becomes  necessary  to  investigate  the  several  grounds 
upon  which  this  claim  is  based,  in  order  that  we  may  be 


t'vl 


«• 


III 


T"***:, 


If! 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


fX 


able  to  make  an  intelligent  choice  among  them.  Then, 
if,  in  tlie  end,  w®  yet  fail  of  reaching  the  truths  we  at 
least  shall  have  done  our  best  to  discover  the  will  of 
God  in  regard  to  our  Church  affiliation;  and  al- 
though we  may  join  a  schismatical  body  instead  of  a 
true  Church,  we  nevertheless  shall  not  be  held  to  have 
been  thoughtlessly  or  willfully  guilty  of  the  great  sin  of 
schism.  It  is  quite  likely  that  some  will  never  be  able 
to  decide  among  "  the  churches,"  and  that  they  may 
make  this  inability  an  excuse  for  remaining  non  church 
members.  To  such  I  would  say:  Join  any  Christian 
body  that  acknowledges  Christ  to  be  the  Divine  Saviour 
of  thd  world,  rather  than  none.  The  identification  of 
yourself  with  any  Denomination  that  administers  Holy 
Baptism  ^'in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and  of  the  Son, 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,"  makes  you  a  member,  not  of 
that  Denomination  only,  but  also  of  the  One,  Holy, 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church.  The  fact  that  Baptism 
does  not  make  us  members  of  a  Denomination,  and 
that  all  duly  baptized  persons  are  members  of  one 
universal  Church  of  Christ,  is  not  generally  known  and 
appreciated  as  it  should  be. 


There  are  three  conceptions  of  what  is  necessary  to 
constitute  an  organization  of  Christians  a  true  branch 
of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ. 

1.  According  to  the  Roman  conception  of  the  Church, 
there  are,  properly  speaking,  no  branches;  for  the  Church 
of  Rome,  so  widely  diffused  throughout  the  world,  is 
the  only  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  that  has  ever 
existed,  or  ever  can  exist.  It  is  claimed  that  the  Pope 
is  the  sole  representative  of  Christ  on  earth,  and  that 
only  by  allegiance  to  him  can  a  person  be  identified 
with  Christ  and  His  true  Church.    These  are  sweeping 


THE   CHOICE   OF    A    CHURCH. 


33 


pretensions.  Their  very  boldness  and  magnitude  are 
well  calculated  to  awe  and  fascinate  the  minds  of  the 
unsophisticated.  "As,"  says  Mr.  Gladstone,  "adver- 
tising houses  find  custom  in  proportion,  not  so  much 
to  the  solidity  of  their  resources,  as  to  the  magnilo- 
quence of  their  promises  and  assurances,  so  theological 
boldness  in  the  extension  of  such  claims  is  sure  to  pay, 
by  widening  certain  circles  of  devoted  adherents,  how- 
ever it  may  repel  the  mass  of  mankind." 

There  are,  however,  unanswerable  objections  to  the 
Roman  claims,  a  full  consideration  of  which  will  require 
a  separate  lecture.t  For  the  present  it  must  suffice 
simply  to  observe  that  they  were  unknown  in  the  ear- 
liest and  purest  ages  of  the  Church.  The  peculiar  posi- 
tion of  Rome  as  the  chief  city  of  the  world  early  tended 
to  the  undue  exaltation  of  her  Bishops  or  Popes,  but 
they  are  on  record  as  repudiating  any  exclusive  right 
or  claim  to  lordship  over  other  Bishops  and  Churches. 
Even  so  late  and  great  a  Pope  as  Gregory  I.,  Bishop  of 
Rome  from  a.d.  590  to  a.d.  604,  rebuked  John  IV., 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  who,  it  is  interesting  to 
note,  was  the  first  to  style  himself  the  ''Ecumenical 
Patriarch"  or  "Universal  Pope."  ''This  title,"  wrote 
Gregory,  "is  profane,  superstitious,  haughty,  and  in- 
vented by  the  first  apostate.  St.  Peter  is  not  called 
universal  Apostle.  No  one  of  my  predecessors  ever  con- 
sented to  use  so  profane  a  title.  Far  from  Christian 
hearts  be  that  blasphemous  name.  I  confidently  affirm 
that  who  calls  himself,  or  wishes  to  be  called,  universal 
Priest,  is  in  his  pride  a  forerunner  of  Antichrist." 

2.  A  satisfactory  discussion  of  the  Denominational 
conception  of  the  Church  also  will  require  a  lecture 
devoted  exclusively  to  its  consideration. §  What  we 
say  at  this  time  must  necessarily  be  fragmentary.    By 

+  Lecture  II.       $  Lecture  III. 
C.  A— 3 


V 


1! 
II 


'  i: 

4'i 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 

the  Denominations  we  mean  all  the  Protestant  bodies, 
except  those  that  are  comprised  within  the  Anglican 
Communion.  The  chief  of  the  Denominations,  in  the 
order  of  their  organization,  are  the  Lutherans,  a.d. 
1517;  Congi-egationalists,  a.d.  1571;  Presbyterians, 
A.D.  1592;  Baptists,  a.d.  1644;  and  Methodists,  a.d. 
1739.  According  to  the  conception  which  prevails 
among  these  and  all  Denominations  of  later  origin,  any 
Christian  is  at  liberty  to  collect  about  him  persons  of 
like  mind  with  himself,  and  to  form  a  society  for  the 
preaching  of  the  Gospel  and  the  administration  of  the 
Sacraments.  Such  societies  are  mutually  acknowl- 
edged to  be  so  many  true  Churches.  In  theory,  at 
least,  these  Churches  are  admitted  to  be  one  as  good 
as  the  other. 

We  are  aware  that  Pi-esbvterians,  Methodists  and 
Lutherans  might  protest,  with  some  show  of  reason, 
that  this  is  not  a  correct  statement  of  their  position. 
"We,"  they  may  say,  "believe  in  Ordination  as  firmly 
as  do  Episcopalians,  but  contend  that  Bishops  and 
Presbyters  are  the  same  Order."  But  the  force  of  this 
objection  is  turned  aside  by  the  consideration  that 
those  who  make  so  much  of  the  Presbytery  when  arg-u- 
ing  against  Episcopacy,  show  little  or  no  regard  for  it 
when  dealing  with  societies  of  Christians  which  confess- 
edly haA^e  a  self-constituted  ministry.  Such  are  recog- 
nized as  standing  upon  the  same  footing  with  them- 
selves. They  ireelj  exchange  with  their  ministers  and 
even  receive  them  into  fellowship,  and  give  them  pas- 
torates  without  reordination.  This  thev  could  not 
do  if  the  Presbyterian  regime  were  held  to  be  by  Divine 
appointment  essential  to  the  constitution  of  a  valid 
ministry.  Mr.  Maclean,  a  writer  who  has  given  con- 
siderable space  to  this  subject,  sj)eaking  of  Scotch  and 
English  Presb^i;erian8,  says  that  they,  "and  the  other 


im 


'1 


HI 


M 


THE    CHOICE    OP    A    CHURCH. 


S5 


bodies  which  are  separated  from  the  ancient  Church, 
are  now  agreed  in  saying  that  it  does  not  matter 
whether  there  is  any  succession  or  none  at  all.  The 
Nonconformist  bodies  do  not  claim  to  have  any  suc- 
cession going  back  to  the  Apostles,  or  going  back  at 
all  more  than  a  few  generations  at  most.  They  all 
really  derive  the  authority  of  their  ministry  from  the 
congregation,  that  is,  from  below  instead  of  from 
above.  They  mostly  hold  that  any  assembly  of  'be- 
lievers' may  appoint  a  man,  either  with  or  without 
the  laying  on  of  hands,  to  the  Holy  Ministry.  For 
this  is  the  way  in  which  the  ministry  of  all  Noncon- 
formist bodies,  or  almost  all,  first  began."  Else- 
where he  writes:  "Scarcely  anyone  now  holds  the 
belief  that  a  succession  of  sacred  ministers  must  be 
passed  on  through  an  unbroken  line  of  Presbyters.  The 
Presbyterians  have  almost  entirely  ceased  to  hold  it, 
and  most  of  them  hold,  with  the  other  nonchurchmen, 
that  the  Christian  congregation  can  appoint  its  own 
ministers." 

It  is  said  that  there  are  above  three  hundred 
Denominations.  According  to  their  principles  a  man 
can  have  his  choice  among  them  ;  or,  if  none  of  them 
accord  with  his  ideas,  he  may  start  one  to  suit  himself. 
This  is  doubtless  the  prevailing  view  with  professing 
Christians  in  America;  but,  taking  the  world  at  large, 
there  are  probably  not  more  than  one-tenth  who  hold 
it.  And  there  is  an  increasing  number  of  the  adherents 
of  the  Denominational  system  who  have  more  or 
less  serious  misgivings  as  to  whether  or  not  a  church 
which  they  might  see  fit  to  found  upon  their  prefer- 
ences in  regard  to  doctrine  or  government,  would 
really  be  a  true  branch  of  the  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church  of  Christ.  They  realize  that  it  is  not 
lawful  for  men  to  make  new  books  written  since  the 


m 


m 


t  [. 


I  ' 


^ii 


36 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


Apostles'  day  and  to  pretend  for  them  that  they 
should  be  received  as  of  Divine  authority.  And,  they 
inquire,  if  the  most  learned,  gifted  and  l)e8t  men  who 
have  lived  since  the  Apostolic  age  cannot  make  a  New 
Testament,  or  add  so  much  as  a  syllable  to  it,  how  can 
any  found  a  new  Church?  Moreover,  they  perceive  that 
the  principles  of  Denominationalism  would  be  rejected 
by  human  organizations  such  as  the  Masons,  Odd 
Fellows  and  Knights  of  Pythias,  and  ask  themselves,  if  I 
cannot  found  a  new  and  independent  lodge,  how  can 
I  found  a  new  and  independent  Church?  And  if  I, 
in  my  day,  cannot  start  such  a  Church,  how  is  it  that 
Luther  and  Brown  and  Calvin  and  Knox  and  Williams 
and  Wesley  and  Campbell  could  do  so  in  their  days?  In 
the  estimation  of  all  such  as  have  regard  to  law  and 
order  and  perceive  the  force  of  the  historical  argument, 
these  questions  can  never  be  satisfactorily  answered  on 
behalf  of  Denominationalism. 

Take  for  example  Mr.  Wesley's  Society.  What  is 
true  of  this,  the  largest  of  modern  Denominations,  is 
true  of  all.  Is  it  a  Church?  If  the  Denominational 
reader  insists  that  "yes"  must  be  the  answer  to  this 
question,  let  me  ask  him,  is  Mr.  Booth's  Society,  known 
as  the  Salvation  Army,  also  a  Church?  As  I  under- 
stand it,  the  founder  and  adherents  of  this  organiza- 
tion do  not  regard  it  as  such ;  nor  have  I  met  with  any 
Denominationalists  who  do.  But  if  Mr.  Wesley's 
Society  is  a  Church,  why  is  not  Mr.  Booth's?  They  were 
both  founded  for  the  same  purpose,  and  their  methods, 
though  differing  in  external  details,  are  in  principle 
essentially  the  same.  The  brass  band,  street  parades, 
and  services  are,  after  all,  only  another  form  of  the  old- 
fashioned  revival  system.  I  am  not  here  pronouncing 
upon  this  way  of  bringing  men  and  women  to  Christ. 
For  the  purpose  of  my  argument  it  is  only  necessary  to 


THE   CHOICE    OP   A    CHURCH. 


37 


point  out  that  according  to  all  reports  Mr.  Booth  and 
his  army  are  using  it  quite  as  successfully  as  Mr.  Wes- 
ley and  his  followers.    Now,  if  the  Methodists  constitute 
a  Church,  why  do  not  the  Salvationists?     True  the 
latter  do  not  claim  to  be  a  Church,  but  neither  did  the 
former  at  first.     Indeed,  I  have  seen  it  stated  that  in 
England  the  Wesleyans  have  not  up  to  date  formally 
claimed  to  be  a  Church,  though  they  have  gradually 
adopted  the  name.    Their  founder  to  the  day  of  his 
death  insisted  that  they  were  not  such,  but  only  a 
society.    Will  the  Denominational  reader  occupy  him- 
self in  trying  to   give  a  satisfactory  answer  to  the 
following  questions:      When   did  Methodism   change 
from  the  state  of  a  society  to  that  of  a  Church  ?     What 
were  the  steps  in  the  transition  ?    Why  is  the  Salvation 
Army  not  a  Church  ?    What  will  it  have  to  do  to  become 
one  ?  An  observing  traveler  in  New  England  sees  over  tlie 
doorway  of  primitive  places  of  worship  the  original  in- 
scription '^  Meeting  House,"  while,  at  the  side,  on  the  mod- 
ern bulletin  board  he  reads  "Congregational  Church." 
What  has  happened  in  the  interval  represented  by  these 
designations  to  justify  the  change  ?    Whoever  attemptsX 
to  answer  these  inquiries  will  ultimately  abandon  the  \ 
Denominational  conception  of  the  Church  and  conclude 
that,  in  the  nature  of  things,  mortal  men  cannot  or-    / 
ganize  a  new  Church  any  more  than  they  can  create  a  / 
new  Bible  or  place  a  new  star  in  the  heavens.  ' 

Bishops  of  regular  and  canonical  descent  from  the 
Apostles  are  the  perpetuators  of  the  Church.  As  a  true 
lodge,  through  its  legally  executed  charter,  must  be  his- 
torically connected  with  its  founder,  so  a  true  Church, 
through  its  lawful  Bishop-successors  of  the  Apostles, 
must  be  able  to  show  an  uninterrupted  continuity  back 
through  the  ages  to  Christ.  One  of  the  earliest  of  the 
Christian  Fathers  and  Doctors  tersely  gave  expression  to 


v,l 


It.' 


I  I 


I.'. 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


( 


■f 


fie  conviction  which  prevailed  universally  during  the 
first  fifteen  hundred  years  when  he  said,  "No  Bishop, 
no  Church." 

The  oldest  of  the  Denominations,  and  in  many  re- 
spects the  most  dignified  and  justifiable  of  them,  the 
Lutherans,  started  about  fifteen  hundred  years  too  late 
to  make  good  its  claim  to  be  a  regular  and  legitimate 
branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  There  will  ever  remain, 
after  all  that  can  be  said  in  justification  of  the  fifteenth 
century  and  later  organizations  of  Christians,  room  for 
reasonable  and  serious  doubt  concerning  their  CathoHc- 
ity.  Such  organizations,  it  will  be  perceived,  would  not 
have  been  recognized  as  true  Churches  in  the  earlier  and 
purer,  or  indeed  in  any  preceding,  ages  of  the  Church. 
They  are  not  so  regarded  even  now ,  and  in  all  proba- 
bility never  will  be,  by  the  vast  majority  of  Christians. 
,/  All  Churches  whose  claim  to  Catholicity  cannot  be  gain- 
said were  founded  by  the  Apostles,  or  by  those  who  "con- 
tinued steadfastly  in  the  Apostles'  doctrine  and  fellow- 
ship, and  in  the  breaking  of  bread  and  in  the  prayers." 
But  the  founders  of  modern  Denominations  were  not 
Apostles  nor  did  anyof  them,  except  the  Wesleys,  remain 
in  communion  with  any  undoubted  branch  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Church.  John  and  Charles  Wesley  lived  and  died  in 
the  communion  of  our  Mother  Church  of  England .  Would 
to  God  that  Coke  and  Asbury  had  done  the  samel 

Those  who  perceive  the  difference  between  a  Divine 
and  a  human  Church,  and  realize  their  obligation  to  be- 
long to  the  former  rather  than  to  the  latter,  can  never 
be  quite  satisfied  in  any  body  of  Chiistians  which  traces 
its  origin  to  uninspired  men,  and  is  not  the  recognized 
offspring  of  any  undisputed  bi-anch  of  the  ancient  Cath- 
olic Church. 

3.  Finally,  w^e  have  the  Greek  and  Anglican  conception 
of  the  Church,  which  is  held  by  all  Christians  outside 


THE   CHOICE    OF    A   CHURCH. 


39 


the  Roman  and  Denominational  Communions.  The 
Greek  Church  is  the  Church  of  Western  Asia  and  East- 
ern  Europe.  It  embraces  nearly  all  Christians  in  Tur- 
key, Servia,  Roumania,  Greece,  Russia,  and  is  strongly 
represented  in  Austria.  The  Anglican  or  English  Com- 
munion includes  all  Christians  in  full  fellowship  with  the 
Church  of  England,  and  is  composed  of  these  par-ts: 
The  Church  of  England,  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States,  the  Church  of  Ireland,  the  Church  of 
Wales,  the  Church  in  Canada,  the  Church  m  Asia,  the 
Church  in  Africa,  the  Church  in  Australia,  the  Church  in 
Scotland,  and  nine  scattered  Dioceses. 

The  Greek  and  Anglican  Churches  are  in  practical 
communion  with  each  other ;  at  least,  they  agree  per- 
fectlv  in  regard  to  their  conception  of  what  is  necessary 
to  constitute  a  Catholic  Church.  According  to  their 
view  there  are  as  many  branches  of  the  true  Church  of 
Christ  as  there  are  nations  in  which  there  is  an  inde- 
pendent Church  that  can  trace  its  origin  to  the  Apostles. 
Each  such  Church  has  a  right  to  self-government,  hav- 
ing respect  only  to  the  general  regulations  of  the  great 
Councils  in  which  the  whole  of  Catholic  Christendom 

was  represented.  ,   *      v 

The  Church,  according  to  the  Greek  and  Anghcan 
conception,  may  be  compared  to  a  fruitful  vine  which, 
having  been  planted  by  the  Apostles  at  Jerusalem,  not 
Rome,  overran,  even  in  their  lifetime,  almost  all  of  the 
then  known  world,  pushing  its  tendrils  into  the  several 
political  divisions  of  Western  Asia,  Northern  Africa  and 
Eastern  Europe.  These  branches  were  in  many  cases 
carried  over  by  the  Apostles  themselves,  and  through 
their  planting  took  independent  root.  The  successors 
of  the  Apostles,  whom  we  call  Bishops,  have  been  going 
on  with  this  work  ever  since,  and  they  will  continue  to 
do  so  untU  the  vine  has  taken  root  in  every  nation  of 


II 


'N  '" 


I 


i  ! 


H 


I* 

Ik 


'I;  ; 

I* 

i  > 


f  1 


I 


40 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


the  eftrth.  Thus  the  one  vine  of  the  Church  of  Christ  has 
as  many  roots  as  there  are  National  Churches.  If  the 
parent  root  of  any  branch  should  wither  and  die,  the 
offspring  would  flourish  nevertheless,  and  if  in  future 
ages  the  surviving  offshoot  should  send  a  branch  back  to 
the  native  land  to  take  new  root  there,  the  second  Church 
of  that  country  would  be  essentially  the  same  as  the  first. 
This  makes  it  impossible  that  the  gates  of  hell  should 
permanently  prevail  against  any  branch  of  the  Church. 
According  to  the  Roman  theory  there  is  only  one  vine 
having  its  root  in  Christ  through  only  one  Bishop,  who 
is  the  representative  of  only  one  Apostle.  The  branches 
of  this  vine  overrun  other  countries,  but  they  do  not 
take  root,  and  thus  have  no  independent  national  life. 
There  is,  therefore,  according  to  this  view,  no  such  thing 
as  a  National  Church.  Of  course,  if  Romanists  are  right 
Anglicans  and  Greeks  are  wrong. 

An  argument  for  the  Scripturalness  of  independent 
National  Churches,  as  well  as  for  the  equality  of  Bishops, 
might  be  built  upon  our  Lord's  commission  to  the 
Apostles,  **  Go  ye  therefore  and  teach  all  nations."  **  Go 
ye,"  not  go  you,  St.  Peter,  and  all  your  successors  in 
the  See  of  Rome,  but  *'go  ye,"  all  the  Apostles  and  all 
their  successors,  and  make  disciples  of  ^'all  nations," 
not  make  missions  of  Rome.  Obedience  to  this  com- 
mand, especially  in  the  early  days  of  Christianity,  when 
the  animosity  between  nations  and  the  difficulties  of 
intercommunication  were  much  greater  than  at  pres- 
ent, made  the  establishment  of  independent  National 
Churches  unavoidable.  Take  England  for  illustration. 
In  obedience  to  Christ's  command  some  early  successor 
of  one  of  the  Apostles,  not  St.  Peter— many  think  it  was 
St.  Paul  himself— preached  the  Gospel  and  established 
the  Church  there.  But  even  as  late  and  intelligent  a 
Pope  as  Gregory  I.  did  not  appear  to  know  of  the  exists 


THE  CHOICE   OF   A   CHURCH. 


41 


ence  of  the  British  Church  until  informed  of  it  by  St. 
Augustine  about  the  year  600.  Nor  can  this  ignorance 
be  accounted  for  by  supposing  that  the  Church  was  in- 
significant. Hundreds  of  years  before,  the  British  Church 
had  been  represented  in  great  Councils  by  a  delegation 
of  Bishops  and  other  Clergy.  This  was  the  case  at  Aries, 
A.  D.  314,  and  Ariminum,  a.  d.  359,  and  probably  at 
Nice,  a.  d.  325,  and  Sardica,  a.  d.  347.  And  though  the 
Church  had  undoubtedly  suffered  severely  fi-om  the  north- 
ern invasions,  there  still  remained  many  Bishops,  Priests 
and  Deacons  who  congi-egated  from  all  parts  to  the 
monasteries  in  the  region  of  Wales,  Scotland  and  Ireland. 
The  number  of  Bishops  at  that  time  we  do  not  know. 
Bede  says  that  seven  were  present  at  a  conference  with 
Augustine.  A  very  ancient  author  reckons  them  as 
twenty-five  Bishops  and  three  Archbishops. 

The   Anglican   idea   concerning  self-governing  Na- 
tional Churches  is  confirmed  by  the  parable  of  the  vine. 
At  least  the  Roman  doctrine  concerning  St.  Peter  and 
the  necessity  to  Catholicity  of  communion  with  the 
Popes,  is  irreconcilable  with  our  Lord's  teachmg  m  this 
passage :    ^^  am  the  Vine,  ye  are  the  branches."    Note 
that  Christ  is  here  represented  as  the  stem  and  root, 
that  the  Apostles  are  only  branches,  that  there  is  no  in- 
dication   that   the  branch   represented   by  St.   Peter 
should,  by  Divine  right,  overshadow  the  rest,  and  that 
there  is  not  the  faintest  allusion  to  his  successors  in  the 
See  of  Rome.    In  order  to  harmonize  the  parable  with 
the  Ultramontane  conception  it  would  have  to  be  recast 
so  as  to  read :  While  in  the  world  I  am  the  Vine,  but 
after  My  ascension  Peter  and  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  one 
after  the  other,  until  the  end  of  the  world,  will  take  My 
place.    Therefore,  in  all  time  to  come,  he  that  abideth  in 
the  Pope,  and  the  Pope  in  him,  the  same  will  bring  forth 
much  fruit,  for  without  the  Pope  you  can  do  nothing. 


|i^ 


i 


I 


•w 


.QHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 

If  a  man  abide  not  In  ti^  Pt>pe,  he  is  cast  forth  as  a 
branch  and  is  withered.  But  since  Romans  interpret 
the  Scriptures  one  way  and  we  another,  let  us  turn  to 
the  history  of  the  earliest  and  purest  ages  for  the  pur- 
pose of  ascertaining  who  are  right. 

The  very  name  of  the  Roman  Church  proves  the 
National  Church  theory,  and  shows  that  originally  she 
was  regarded  as  one  of  the  state  Churches.  Her  official 
name  is  "The  Holy  Catholic  x\postolic  Roman  Church." 
Before  the  Council  of  Trent  it  was  ''The  Holy  Roman 
Church.''  The  word  "Roman"  in  this  title  is  inexplic- 
able upon  the  hypothesis  that  the  Papal  Communion 
comprised  the  whole  of  Catholic  Christendom. 

Again,  the  phrase  "The  Catholic  Churches,"  which 
occurs  so  frequently  in  the  writings  of  both  the  Latin 
and  Greek  Fathers,  cannot  be  explained  in  harmony 
with  the  Roman  theory  of  Catholicity,  for  how  could 
they  speak  of  more  than  one  Catholic  Church,  if  "The 
Holy  Roman  Church"  could  make  good  its  exclusive 
pretensions?  St.  Irenaeus  bears  witness  to  the  National 
Church  idea  when  he  says :  "  and  neither  do  the  Churches 
founded  in  Germany,  nor  those  of  Spain,  in  Gaul,  in  the 
East,  in  Egypt,  in  Africa,  nor  in  the  regions  in  the  mid- 
dle of  the  earth,  believe  or  deliver  a  different  Faith." 

The  Church  is  com])ared  by  the  Fathers  to  the  sea, 
as  being  diffused  throughout  all  the  world;  as  being, 
like  it,  one;  as  having  one  name,  that  of  the  Catholic 
Church;  and  as  containing  within  it  many  Churches 
with  various  names,  as  the  ocean  has  many  bays 
within  it. 

The  so-called  "Canons  or  laws  of  the  Apostles," 
which  were  compiled  about  the  end  of  the  second  century, 
distinctly  mention  the  existence  of  independent  state  or 
national  Churches.  "It  is  necessary,"  runs  the  thirty- 
fourth  canon,  "that  the  Bishops  of  every  nation  should 


THE    CHOICE    OF    A    CHURCH. 


43 


know  who  is  first  among  them,  recognize  him  as  such, 
and  do  nothing  important  without  his  assent."  How 
unfortunate  it  is  for  the  Papal  claims  that  this  cele- 
brated canon  was  not  worded  something  like  this:  It 
is  necessary  that  every  Bishop  throughout  the  world 
should  know  that  he  is  subject  to  the  Pope  of  Rome,  and 
that  he  should  do  nothing  of  importance  without  first 
securing  his  consent. 

The  local  character  of  "  The  Holy  Roman  Church  " 
was  recognized  by  Pope  Innocent  III.,  a.d.  1198-1216, 
who,  though  given  to  the  most  unwarrantable  efforts 
towards  the  aggrandizement  of  his  position,  says,  in  a 
letter  to  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople:  "That  is 
called  the  Church  universal  which  consists  of  all  the 
Churches  and  is  named  from  the  Greek  word  Catholic. 
And  in  this  sense  of  the  word  the  Roman  Church  is  not 
the  Church  universal,  but  a  part  of  the  Church  univer- 
sal."   Gregory  IX.,  a.d.  1227-41,  admitted  that  the 
Eastern  Church  was  a  part  of  the  universal  Church. 
Even  as  late  as  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century,  the 
Council  of  Trent,  presided  over  by  Pius  IV.,  tacitly 
acknowledged  the  existence  of  National  Churches ;  for 
the  creed  which  it  formulated  declared  that  Rome  was 
"the  Mother  and  Mistress  of  all  Churches."    It  is  im- 
|)ossible  to  escape  the  logical   conclusion  that  there 
must  have  been  more  than  one  Church  in  the  minds  of 
the  Pope  and  theologians ;  for  otherwise  that  of  Rome 
could  not  be  regarded  as  a  mother. 

But  if  there  be  any  room  for  doubt  as  to  the  opinion 
of  Innocent  III.  and  Pius  IV.,  upon  this  subject,  there  is 
none  whatever  when  we  go  back  to  the  time  of  Pope 
Gregory  I.  Bede  records  that  among  the  questions  sub- 
mitted to  this  Pontiff  by  St.  Augustine,  who,  in  a.d.596, 
had  been  sent  by  him  to  England,  was  the  following: 
"When  there  is  but  one  Faith,  why  are  there  different 


lili! 


44 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


customs  of  Churches,  and  why  is  one  custom  of  Masses 
observed  in  the  Holy  Roman  Church,  and  another  in  the 
Church  of  Gaul?''  To  which  Pope  Gregory  made  this 
answer:  "You,  my  brother,  know  the  custom  of  the 
Roman  Church,  in  w  hich  you  remember  that  you  your- 
self were  brought  up.  But  my  sentence  is,  that  whether 
in  the  Roman,  or  the  Gallican,  or  in  any  Church,  you 
have  found  an^^ thing  which  may  be  more  pleasing  to 
Omnipotent  God,  you  carefully  select,  and  with  special 
instruction  impart  to  the  Church  of  the  English,  which, 
as  yet,  is  new  to  theFaith,  what  things  j^ou  have  been 
able  to  collect  from  many  Churches.  *For  things  are  not 
to  be  loved  for  the  sake  of  places,  but  places  for  the 
sake  of  things.  From  each  individual  Church,  therefore, 
choose  the  things  w^hich  are  pious,  which  are  religious, 
which  are  right,  and  deposit  these  things— when  you 
have  collected  them,  as  it  were,  into  a  bundle— in  the 
minds  of  the  English  for  their  use." 

It  cannot,  therefore,  be  disputed,  by  any  who  ac- 
knowledge the  infallibility  of  the  Popes,  that  there  were, 
at  least  in  England  and  Gaul,  National  Churches  which 
were  separate  and  distinct  from  the  Church  of  Rome. 
Until  the  Council  of  Trent,  Roman  writers,  like  those  of 
the  rest  of  the  world,  speak  of  the  Churches  of  these 
countries,  and  of  Germany  and  Spain,  and,  in  fact,  of 
every  nation,  in  such  a  way  as  to  show  conclusively  that 
the  idea  of  the  Church's  being  one  universal  communion 
with  Rome  and  her  Bishop  as  its  indispensable  center, 
had  not  been  conceived,  or  at  least  did  not  obtain,  even 
among  Ultramontanists,  until  after  the  middle  of  the 
sixteenth  century. 

If  the  present  Roman  theory  and  the  interpretation 
given  to  the  texts  by  which  it  is  supported  be  correct, 
we  ought  to  find  that  during  the  first  three  or  four  hun- 
dred years,  all  Churches  were  subject  to  the  Bishop 


THE   CHOICE   OF    A    CHURCH. 


45 


of  Rome,  and  that  there  was  no  such  thing  to  be 
found  in  all  the  world  as  an  independent  Provincial  or 
National  Church.     On  the  other  hand,  if  the  Anglican 
theory  be  tenable,  it  will  appear  that  during  this  period 
the  Churches  of  the  several  political  divisions  through- 
out  the  vast  Roman  Empire  governed  themselves  with- 
out practically  any  reference   to  the  Bishops  of  the 
capital  city,  or  to  any  other  external  authority  except 
the  decrees  of  the  General  Councils.    Those  who  have 
not  taken  the  pains  to  investigate  the  truth  of  the 
representations  of  modern  Romanists  respecting  their 
universal  sway  in  primitive  times,  will  be  surprised 
when  they  learn  the  real  extent  of  the  original  Diocese 
presided  over  by  the  Bishops  of  the  Imperial  city,  and 
of  the  comparatively  little  influence  and  power  that 
they  exercised  abroad  during  the  first  four  or  five  cen- 
turies.    The  limits  of  the  original  Papal  See  were  those 
of  the  city  of  Rome.  Even  after  the  development  of  the 
Patriarchal  system  the  region  in  which  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  was  first  among  equals  was  by  no  means  co-ex- 
tensive with  Italy.  ''  Italy,"  says  an  Ecclesiastical  geog- 
rapher, *'from  very  early  times  was  divided  into  two 
gi^eat  Provinces.    First,  the  Italic  Diocese,  which  com- 
prehended the  present  Kingdom  of  Lombardy,  and  the 
other  countries  subject  to   the  Empire  south  of  the 
Danube,  of  which  Milan  was  the  metropolis;  and,  sec- 
ond,  that  of  Rome,   which   comprised   Tuscany,  the 
recekt  States  of  the  Church,  Naples,  Sicily  and  the  Med- 
iterranean Islands  ot  Sardinia  and   Corsica,  usually 
known  as  the  Loca  Suburbicaria." 

Now,  in  the  early  times,  the  primacy  of  the  Bishops 
of  Rome  was  confined  to  the  limits  of  the  Suburbica- 
rian  Churches,  and  his  jurisdiction  to  the  city.  He 
had  nothing  whatever  to  do  with  the  great  Italian 
Churches  of  Ravenna,  Aquileia  or  Milan.    Ravenna  was 


t 


' 


CHURCH   MEMBEKSHIP. 

only  about  a  hundred  and  eighty  miles  northeast  of 
Kome;  Aquileia  was  three  hundred  miles  in  that  direc- 
tion, and  Milan  about  the  same  distance  to  the  north- 
west. Since  the  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope  was  originally 
confined  to  Kome,  and  his  primacy  was  so  far  from  be- 
ing coextensive  with  Italy  itself,  we  might  regard  it  safe 
to  conclude  that  he  had  nothing  to  say  about  the  gov- 
ernment of  the  Church  in  remoter  parts  of  Christendom. 
But  we  are  not  left  to  conjecture  on  this  point.  There 
is  abundant  evidence,  known  to  all  readers  of  Ecclesias- 
tical History,  that  the  Churches  of  Palestine,  Asia  Minor, 
Africa,  France,  Spain  and  England  were  all  for  the  first 
six  centuries,  and  some  of  them  during  the  first  thou- 
sand years,  quite  independent  of  Roman,  or  any  other 
foreign,  domination.  In  fact,  such  of  these  Churches  as 
compose  the  gi*eat  Greek  Communion  have  never  sub- 
mitted in  the  least  degree  to  Papal  dominion. 

"  Janus  "  *  says :  **  There  are  many  National  Churches 
which  were  never  under  Rome,  and  never  even  had  any 
intercourse  by  letter  with  Rome,  without  this  being  con- 
sidered a  defect,  or  causing  any  difficulty  about  Church 
Communion.  Such  an  autonomous  Church,  always  in- 
dependent of  Rome,  was  the  most  ancient  of  those 

•"Janus"  was  a  mythological  deity  of  the  Latins  who  had  the  power  of 
looking  both  ways  at  once.  It  was  therefore,  not  without  significance,  assumed 
as  the  pen  name  by  the  profoundly  learned  German  authors  of "  The  Pope  and 
the  Council,"  a  powerful  protest  against  the  proposition  to  declare  the  infalli- 
bility of  the  Papacy.  It  looked  at  the  question  from  both  the  standpoint  of 
history  and  expediency.  Professor  SchafT  speaks  of  this  work  as  '♦  a  book  which 
will  be  memorable  in  the  history  of  literature  as  one  of  the  most  crushing 
blows  ever  struck  in  any  controversy.  It  is  the  work  of  more  than  one  learned 
theologian  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  and  deals  with  the  question  of  in- 
fallibility from  the  root.  It  shows  that  the  theological  opinion  in  favor  of  Papal 
Infallibility,  as  it  has  been  held  by  many  in  other  ages,  was  the  offspring  of 
sheer  imposture  and  wholesale  forgery  sustained  and  repeated  from  genera- 
tion to  generation,  and  that  many  other  claims  of  the  Papacy  rest  on  like 
foundation."  There  is  considerable  uncertainty  about  its  authorship.  It  is 
supposed  to  be  the  joint  work  of  Professors  Von  Dollinger,  Fried  rich  and  Hu- 
ber  of  the  University  of  Munich.  There  seems  to  be  little  room  for  doubt  that 
the  famous  Dr.  Von  Dollinger  was  the  chief  writer  and  the  editor  of  the  whole. 


THE    CHOICE    OF    A    CHURCH. 


47 


founded  beyond  the  limits  of  the  Empire,  the  Armenian, 
wherein  the  primatial  dignity  descended  for  a  long  time 
in  the  family  of  the  national  Apostle,  Gregory  the  Illumi- 
nator. The  great  Syro-Persian  Church  in  Mesopotamia 
and  the  western  part  of  the  Kingdom  of  the  SassanidiB, 
with  its  thousands  of  Martyrs,  was  from  the  first,  and 
always  remained,  equally  free  from  any  influence  of 
Rome.  In  its  records  and  its  rich  literature  we  find  no 
trace  of  the  arm  of  Rome  having  reached  there.  The 
same  holds  good  of  the  Ethiopian  or  Abyssinian  Church, 
which  was  indeed  united  to  the  See  of  Alexandria,  but 
wherein  nothing,  except  perhaps  a  distant  echo,  was 
heard  of  the  claims  of  Rome.  In  the  West,  the  Irish  and 
the  ancient  British  Church  remained  for  centuries  au- 
tonomous, and  under  no  sort  of  influence  of  Rome." 

This  being  notoriously  the  case,  what  becomes  of 
the  assertion  of  Romanists  that  the  Church  of  England 
and  the  American  Episcopal  Church  ,are  not  true 
branches  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  because  they 
are  not  under  the  dominion  of  St.  Peter's  successor  in 
the  See  of  Rome?  May  we  not  effectually  answer  that 
if  obedience  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is  essential  to  Cath- 
olicity, the  Church  did  not  exist  anywhere  in  all  the 
world  during  the  first  six  centuries  after  the  Ascension, 
except  in  the  little  Diocese  of  Rome?  Roman  Catholics 
feel  the  weakness  of  their  cause  when  pleaded  at  the  bar 
of  antiquity;  hence,  in  the  person  of  one  of  their  most 
representative  Cardinals,  Manning,  they  have  pro- 
claimed that  to  appeal  to  history  instead  of  the  Pope 
is  a  sin  no  less  heinous  than  "treason"  and  "heresy. 


!'  ■  f 


i  m 


i«i 


Though  the  Roman  view  diff"ers  widely  and  funda- 
mentally from  the  Anglican  and  Greek  conception, 
there  is  manifest  agreement  in  the  belief  that  there  can 


p 


I  :• 


48 


CMURCfl    MEMfefiRSHll*. 


be  no  such  thing:  as  a  valid  Church  of  Christ,  to  which 
it  is  the  duty  of  non  church  members  to  belong,  unless 
there  be  an  historical  connection  with  Him  through 
Bishops  in  unbroken  succession  from  the  Apostles.  We 
also  agree  thattlie  Church  is  a  Divine  institution  with 
a  human  mission.  Denominationalists  think  that  it  is  a 
human  institution  with  a  Divine  mission.  We  hold  that 
the  Church  is  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  seeking  men  on 
earth ;  they  that  it  is  a  society  on  earth  seeking  the 
Kingdom  of  Heaven.  We  think  that  it  is  an  organi- 
zation for  dispensing  Christianity;  they  that  it  is  for 
the  attainment  of  Christianity.  On  these  points  Ro- 
mans, Greeks  and  Anglicans,  who  constitute  about 
nine-tenths  of  Christendom,  are  agreed. 

It  may  as  well  be  observed  here  as  elsewhere  that 
our  argument  in  many  places  throughout  this  book  is 
on  behalf  of  the  whole  of  the  great  ancient  Catholic 
Church.  If  we  were  to  contend  thus  for  some  nonessen- 
tial feature  of  the  Anglican  Communion,  however  ad- 
mirable in  itself,  what  we  say  might  apparently  for  good 
reason  be  disregarded  as  an  ebullition  of  the  sectarian 
spirit;  but  as  we  speak  for  the  whole  of  Christendom 
during  the  first  fifteen  centuries,  and  for  the  overwhelm- 
ing majority  in  our  own  time,  it  will  surely  be  conceded 
that  we  are  entitled  to  a  respectful  hearing. 

Even  the  small  minority  who  maintain  that  connec- 
tion with  Christ  through  Bishops  of  the  Apostolic  suc- 
cession is  not  necessary  to  the  existence  of  a  true 
Church,  did  not  originally  reject  the  Historic  Episcopate 
because  they  thought  it  to  be  unscriptural,  but  because 
of  the  force  of  circumstances.  Luther  intended  that  his 
followers  should  be  governed  by  regularly  consecrated 
Bishops  as  soon  as  they  could  be  obtained.  Calvin  ap- 
plied to  the  Church  of  England  for  Consecration ;  Wesley 
to  a  Greek  Bishop ;  and  Dr.  Coke  first  to  the  American 


THE    CHOICE    OF    A    CHURCH. 


49 


and  then  to  the  English  Episcopate.  The  hopes  and 
schemes  of  these  were  in  each  case  frustrated,  but  their 
advice  and  efforts  should  deter  any  of  their  admirers, 
who  cannot  like  them  plead  necessity,  from  choosing  a 
non-Episcopal  Church  for  membership,  and,  also,  their 
example  should  turn  the  face  of  all  Lutherans,  Presby- 
terians and  Methodists  towards  Episcopacy. 

Of  course  Anglicans,   Romanists,    and   Denomina- 
tionalists each  cite  Holy  Scripture  in  support  of  the 
claim  that  their  respective    organizations    are  true 
branches  of  Christ's  Church.    In  view  of  our  wide  differ- 
ences, outsiders  cannot  decide  which  is  right,  and  what 
Church  to  join,  unless  they  can  determine  which  is  the 
best  interpreter  of  the  New  Testament  teaching.    Now 
it  so  happens  that  all  of  us  are  able  to  refer  such  to 
an  interpreter,  which  we  severally  regard  as  eminently 
trustworthy.     Romans   direct  us  to  the  Pope,   and 
Denominationalists  to  their  founders  and  bright  lights, 
but  the  Episcopal  Church  has   no   modern  Pope  or 
founder ;  so,  instead  of  referring  to  personal  interpre- 
ters, we  have  always  asked  inquirers  to  examine  our 
claims  in  the  light  of  the  early  Fathers  and  the  history 
of  the  Church.    We  think  that  those  who  lived  nearest 
the  time  of  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles  knew  more  con- 
cerning their  teaching  than  the  Christians  of  subse- 
quent ages,  and  that  consequently  what  they  said  and 
did  must  be  taken  into  account  by  those  who  would 
conscientiously  and   intelligently  choose  between  the 
Anglican  and  Roman  Churches  or  amongst  the  various 
Protestant  bodies  of  Christians. 

We  are  well  aware  that  with  tens  of  thousands  of 
the  representatives  of  the  Denominations  which  have 
sprung  up  in  the  course  of  the  last  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years,  the  historical  argument  will  be  without 
influence.     They  contend  that  a  Church,  which  it  is 

C.A.-4 


f 


i 


I{  «' 

•  II 


50 


CHURCH    MEMBERSHIP. 


quite  within  the  power  of  a  half  dozen  Christians  to 
organize  at  any  time,  may  have  a  much  greater  claim 
upon  the  allegiance  of  non  church  members  than  some 
undoubted  branch  of  the  Historic  Church  of  Christ. 
But  as  time  goes  on,  the  test  of  history  is  sure  to  be 
applied  more  and  more  by  the  educated  and  reflecting 
who  are  guided  by  principle  rather  than  by  preference 
in  the  choice  of  their  Church  relationship. 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


LECTURE  II. 

OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITM    ROAANISTS. 

I.     Papal   Infallibility. 
II.     Jurisdiction   of  the   Pope. 

III.  Anglican   Orders. 

IV.  Leo  XIII.'s  Decree  of  Invalidity. 


im 


AUTHORITIES. 


Bacon,  The  Vatican  Council, 

Barrow,  The  Papal  Supremacy. 

Bennett,  The  Distinctive  Errors  of  Romanism. 

Brightman,  What  Objections  Have  Been  Made  to  English  Orders. 

CoLLETTE,  The  Papacy. 

CoxE,  Bp., Institutes  of  Christian  History. 

CouRAYER,  On  English  Ordinations. 

Denny,  Anglican  Orders  and  Jurisdiction, 

Gayer,  Papal  Infallibility  and  Supremacy. 

Gibbons,  Cardinal,  Our  Christian  Heritage. 

Gore,  Canon,  Roman  Catholic  Claims. 

GuETTE,  Abbe,  The  Papacy. 

Haddan,  Apostolic  Succession  in  the  Church  of  England. 

Hussey,  On  the  Rise  of  the  Papal  Power. 

**  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council. 

Jenkins,  Romanism:  An  Examination  of  the  Creed  of  Pope 
Pius  the  IV. 

Jenkins,  The  Privilege  of  Peter. 

Lee,  The  Validity  of  the  Holy  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Leto,  Rome  During  the  Vatican  Council. 

Littledale,  Plain  Reasons  Against  Joining  the  Church  of  Rome. 

Littledale,  The  Petrine  Claims. 

Moore  and  Brinckman,  The  Anglican  Brief  Against  Roman 
Claims. 

Newman,  Apologia  Pro  Vita  Sua. 

Paton,  British  History  and  Papal  Claims.     (2  Vols.) 

Puller,  The  Primitive  Saints  and  the  See  of  Rome. 

Ramsay,  Prop.,  The  Church  in  the  Roman  Empire. 

Robertson,  The  Growth  of  the  Papal  Powet. 

Robins,  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church. 

Salmon,  Infallibility  of  the  Church. 

Seymour,  Bp.,  What  Is  Modern  Romanism? 

Smith,  English  Orders. 

Spencer,  Papalism  versus  Catholic  Truth. 

Stearns,  The  Faith  of  Our  Forefathers. 

Treat,  The  Catholic  Faith. 

Wilson,  The  Papal  Supremacy  and  Provincial  System. 

PAMPHLETS. 

Butler,  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders. 
Hopkins,  John  Henry,  Monsignor  Capel. 
Littledale,  Words  for  Truth. 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH 
ROMANISTS. 


THE  object  of  this  lecture  is  to  correct  two  widely 
spread,    mistaken   impressions   concerning  the 
Episcopal  Church,  namely,  that  her  sympathy  is, 
upon   the  whole,   with   Eomanism    rather   than  with 
Protestantism,  and  that  she  is  not  Catholic  because  she 
does  not  form  a  part  of  the  Papal  Communion. 

Here  and  there  is  to  be  found  a  person  who,  havmg 
heard  the  claims  of  Rome,  is  possessed  with  the  uncom- 
fortable misgiving  that  perhaps,  after  all,  they  are  true, 
and  that  in  standing  aloof  from  the  Pope  he  is  living  m 
disobedience  to  the  will  of  God.    The  number  of  such 
among  Protestants  of  every  name  is  probably  greater 
than  is  generally  supposed.    Certainly  there  are  multi- 
tudes who  are  more  or  less  disconcerted  whenever  they 
enter  into  an  argument  with  Romanists,  or  read  any  of 
their  controversial  books.    So  far  as  non-Episcopahans 
are  concerned  their  embarrassment  is  easily  accounted 
for    They  rest  their  whole  case  upon  '^  the  Bible  and  the 
Bible  alone."    Owing  to  the  many-sided  character  of 
Revelation,  Romanists  are  able  to  cite  as  many  texts  m 
support  of  their  position  as  Protestants  are.    If  excep- 
tion be  taken  to  their  interpretations,  they  reply :      We 
have  as  good  a  right  to  our  opinion  in  such  matters  as 
vou  have  to  yours." 

In  the  Roman  controversy,  Episcopalians  have  this 
advantage  over  other  Protestants  that,  being  connected 
in  unbroken  continuity  with  the  Apostolic  Church,  and 

(53) 


i 


", 


'f 


f 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


havings  rid  themselves  of  erroneous  doctrines,  and 
superstitious  ceremonies  which  grew  up  in  the  Dark 
Ages,  they  are  able  to  wield  the  two-edged  sword  of 
Scripture  and  history.  With  this  weapon  in  hand,  and 
standing  on  the  vantage  ground  of  the  Reformation, 
we  are,  indeed,  weak  Anglo-Catholics,  if  unable  to  van- 
quish the  most  powerful  champion  of  the  Papacy.  Any 
person  of  average  intelligence,  who  has  attentively  read 
one  of  our  Reformation  fathers,  or  such  writers  of  this 
generation  as  Littledale,  Salmon,  Puller,  Hopkins,  Kip, 
Little,  Ingram,  and  many  others  whose  books  are  easily 
procured,  is  more  than  a  match  for  all  the  Cardinal 
Gibbons  and  Newmans  and  Mannings  that  Rome  can 
produce.  An  Episcopalian  who  has  any  hesitancy  in 
meeting  an  intelligent  Roman  Catholic  Layman,  or 
even  Priest,  in  debate,  should  reijuest  his  Rector  to 
deliver  a  course  of  lectures  on  the  points  of  difference 
between  Romanists  and  ourselves,  or  at  least  to  lend 
bim  a  book  upon  the  subject. 


I. 

PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY. 

SINCE  the  year  1870,  belief  in  the  inerrancy  of  the 
Pope,  as  the  guide  of  mankind  in  the  way  of  truth 
and  life,  has  been  made  the  condition  of  member- 
ship in  the  Roman  Church  and  of  salvation.  Of  all  the 
articles  which  Rome  has  added  to  "the  Faith  once  de- 
livered to  the  Saints,"  this  is  the  most  remarkable,  both 
for  its  presumptuousness  and  for  its  irreconcilableness 
to  Scripture,  reason  and  history.  No  wonder  that  its 
promulgation  caused  even  the  Ultramontane  Com- 
munion fairly  to  reel  with  astonishment,  and  that  it 
set  on  foot  as  a  reformatory  movement  headed  by  Dol- 
linger,  the  greatest  theologian  of  the  Roman  obedience 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


55 


if  not  indeed  of  modern  times,  who  with  other  scarcely 
less  distinguished  scholars  restored  the  ''Old  Catholic 
Church"  to  parts  of  Europe.  Nor  was  this  all.  The 
knowledge  that  the  Jesuits  were  bent  upon  having  the 
Pope  declared  infallible  gave  a  great  impetus  to  the 
Liberal  School  of  Romanists.  Many,  representing 
almost  every  country  of  Christendom,  who  could  not 
quite  justify  separation  even  from  a  heretical  Church, 
felt,  nevertheless,  in  conscience  bound  to  identify  them- 
selves with  this  movement  in  ringing  protests. 

There  is  little  room  for  doubt  that  the  resolution  to 
make  the  dogma  of  infallibility  an  article  of  faith  would 
have  been  voted  down,  if  free  and  full  discussion  had 
been  allowed  and  if  the  vote  had  been  at  all  representa- 
tive  of  the  whole  communion.    But  the  Jesuits,  with 
whom  Pius  IX.  cooperated,  took  care  to  pack  the  Coun- 
cil with  Italians  and  others  whose  votes  could  be  relied 
upon.  As  there  was  some  reason  to  fear  that  the  num- 
ber of  these  among  the  legitimate  Cardinals  and  Bishops 
might  fall  short  of  an  overwhelming  majority,  a  host  of 
native  titular,  or  merely  nominal,  Ecclesiastical  digni- 
taries was  created.    By  this  desperate  expedient,  Italy 
had  an  altogether  disproportionate  representation  of 
two  hundred  and  seventy-six  delegates.    France,  with 
a  much  larger  Roman  Catholic  population,  had  only 
eighty-four,  Germany,  nineteen  and  the  United  States, 
forty-eight.    By  one  means  and  another  Pius  IX.  made 
sure  of  the  enormous  majority  of  576  votes  out  of  770, 
for  the  dogma  of  infallibility.    All  whose  attitude  was 
in  the  least  doubtful  were,  as  far  as  possible,  persuaded 
to  accept  his  lavish  hospitality.    The  Pope  himself  had 
his  good-humored  jokes  about  the  numbers  who  com- 
promised  themselves  by  living  like  princes  at  his  ex- 
pense.   "  If  they  do  not,"  said  he,  "  make  me  infallible, 
they  will  render  me  Wlire,''  that  is,  bankrupt. 


I 


t 


56 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


After  the  resourceful  Pontiff  and  Jesuits  had  done  all 
they  could  to  minimize  the  opposition,  what  little 
remained  was,  by  one  means  and  another,  coerced  so 
that  only  the  most  fearless  could  summon  sufficient 
courage  to  raise  their  voices  in  debate ;  and  even  these 
were  prevented  by  strategy  from  speaking  at  length 
and  by  the  notoriously  bad  acoustics,  designedly  so, 
of  the  hall  erected  for  the  meeting,  were  not  heard 
except  by  a  few  in  the  region  of  the  platform.  The 
wary  infallibilists  instinctively  felt  that  it  would  not 
do  to  give  such  Germans  as  the  authors  of  '^  Janus," 
or  Frenchmen  as  the  Archbishop  of  Paris,  or  Amer- 
icans as  Archbishop  Kenrick,  the  floor  for  extended 
speeches.  The  proceedings  were,  of  course,  in  the  offi- 
cial language  of  the  Roman  Church,  which  all  Prelates 
could  understand  and  speak,  though  very  few  of  them 
with  sufficient  ease  to  do  justice  to  themselves  and  their 
subjects.  "Quirinus"  asserts  that  nine-tenths  of  the 
Prelates  were  condemned  to  silence  simply  from  being 
unable  to  speak  Latin  readily  and  coherently  through 
want  of  regular  practice.  And  to  this  must  be  added 
the  embarrassment  occasioned  by  diversities  of  pro- 
nunciation. It  was  impossible,  for  example,  for  French- 
men or  Italians  to  understand  an  Englishman's  Latin. 

The  rules  of  order  provided  that  the  chairman,  who, 
of  course,  was  the  Pope's  appointee  and  trusted  repre- 
sentative, might  call  any  speaker  to  order  for  wander- 
ing from  the  question  and  deny  him  liberty  to  proceed. 
No  ap|>eal  from  the  decision  of  the  chair  was  allowed. 
The  working  of  this  rule  is  illustrated  by  the  experience 
of  Monsig-nor  Haynald,  one  of  the  most  prominent 
Bishops  in  the  opposition.  In  proof  of  a  statement  in 
his  address  he  made  some  historical  quotation,  which 
showed  that  on  the  occasion  of  the  reform  of  the 
Boman  Breviary,  a  Pope  had  expressed  an  opinion  con- 


PAPAL   INFALLIBILITY. 


57 


trary  to  that  of  the  present  majority  in  the  Council. 
Thereupon,  the  president  immediately  requested  him  to 
stop,  and  to  descend  from  the  tribune.  Anything  like 
debate  was  precluded.  Offhand  remarks  were  out  of 
order.  The  speakers  were  required  to  give  notice 
some  days  in  advance  of  their  wish  to  be  heard.  They 
had  to  speak  in  the  order  of  their  rank,  without  refer- 
ence to  the  relevancy  of  any  speaker's  remarks  to  those 
of  his  predecessors.  No  reply  was  permitted.  When, 
on  the  3rd  day  of  June,  1870,  the  debates  of  the  Coun- 
cil on  the  main  question  were  suddenly  silenced,  there 
remained  on  the  list  of  those  who  had  signified  their  in^ 
tention  to  speak,  the  names  of  some  forty  Bishops  who 
were  still  unheard.  They  were  forbidden,  by  the  rules  of 
the  Council,  to  print  their  views  for  private  circulation 
among  the  Bishops;  and  the  spiritual  prohibition  was 
reenforced  by  police  arrangements  which  locked  every 
printing  office  in  Rome  against  them.  But  while  noth- 
ing derogatory  to  the  dogma  of  infallibility  could  be 
printed,  the  organs  of  the  Pope  had  full  freedom  to 
publish  what  they  pleased. 

However,  an  American  Prelate,  Archbishop  Kenrick, 
of  St.  Louis,  refused  to  be  thus  gagged.  Claiming  a 
"Divine  right  to  express  his  convictions,  on  this  most 
important  question,  to  his  fellow-Bishops,"  he  sent  the 
carefully  prepared  manuscript  of  his  Latin  speech  to 
a  printer  in  Naples,  where,  under  the  flag  of  an  excom- 
municated king,  might  be  found  that  liberty  for  the 
Bishops  of  the  Church  which  was  denied  them  in  the 
States  of  the  Church  itself.  A  copy  of  this  remarkable 
document  afterwards  fell  into  the  hands  of  the  author 
of  "  An  Inside  View  of  the  Vatican  Council,"  by  whom  it 
was  translated,  and  made  an  appendix  to  his  excellent 
volume.  We  shall  have  occasion  frequently  to  quote 
from  it,  and  from  the  other  notable  protests  of  German 


III 


58 


OUR   CONTBOVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


aiid  FreiK^li  Romanists  against  the  scheme  which  had 
been  prepared  for  the  Council  by  the  Pope  and  the 
Jesuits. 

x\nother  expedient  that  was  resorted  to,  for  the  pur- 
pose of  making  stiw  of  the  end  in  view,  was  the  post- 
ponement of  the  voting  upon  the  dogma  of  infallibility 
until  the  intolerable  Summer  heat  of  Rome  had  driven 
two  hundred  and  thirty-five  Bishops  from  the  Council. 
Of  the  delegates  from  foreign  countries  who  were  in  the 
city  when  the  vole  was  finally  taken,  many  were  de- 
tained from  the  session  by  sickness,  and  others  would 
not  attend  because  of  their  disgust  at  the  way  in  which 
the  council  had  been  manipulated.  A  private  vote  was 
taken  on  July  13, 1870,  only  five  days  before  the  pro- 
mulgation of  the  doctrine  of  infallibility,  which  resulted 
in  four  hundred  and  fifty-one  aflfirmative  and  eighty- 
eight  negative  votes;  sixty-two  Bishops  giving  a  quali- 
fied affirmative,  and  ninety-one  abstaining  from  voting, 
although  present  in  Rome.  * 'Among  the  negative  votes 
were  the  Prelates  most  distinguished  for  learning  and 
])OKition,  as  Schwarzenberg,  Cardinal  Prince-Archbishop 
of  Prague;  Rauscher,  Cardinal  Prince-Archbishop  of 
Vienna ;  Darboy,  Archbishop  of  Paris ;  Matthieu,  Cardi- 
nal-Archbishop of  Besancon ;  Ginoulliiac,  Archbishop  of 
Lyons;  Dupanloup,  Bishop  of  Orleans;  Maret,  Bishop  of 
Sura ;  Simor,  Archbishop  of  Gran  and  Primate  of  Hun- 
gary; Haynald,  Archbishop  of  Kalocsa;  Forster,  Prince- 
Archbishop  of  Breslau;  Scherr,  Archbishop  of  Munich; 
Ketteler,  Bishop  of  Mayence ;  Hefele,  Bishop  of  Rotten- 
burg;  Strossmayer,  Bishop  of  Bosnia  and  Sirmium; 
MacHale,  Archbishop  of  Tuam;  Connolly,  Archbishop 
of  Halifax;  Kenrick,  Archbishop  of  St.  Louis.''  If 
scholarship  instead  of  votes  had  counted,  the  minority 
would  have  been  found  to  overweigh  the  majority  by 
much  as  a  giant  outweighs  a  pygmy.    Thus  the 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


59 


article  of  infallibility  was  added  to  the  Ultramontane 
creed  by  the  Jesuits  and  ignorant  Italians  and  not  by 
the  Roman  Church  as  a  whole. 

All  accounts  of  the  Vatican  Council  contain  ref- 
erences to  a  remarkable  coincidence.    Its  two  most  im- 
portant days  were  December  8,  1869,  when  the  mag- 
nificent opening  session  was  held,  and  July  18,  1870, 
when  the  vote  upon  the  momentous  question,  whether 
or  not  the  Pope  should  be  declared  infallible,  was  taken. 
Both  of  these  events  occurred  during  the  most  terrific 
storms  of  which  the  oldest  inhabitants  of  Rome  had 
any  recollection.    The  thunder  and  lightning  were  ap- 
paUing,  and  the  darkness  was  so  great  at  midday  that 
the  ceremonies  and  business  could  not  proceed  without 
artificial  light.    A  candle  had  to  be  brought  in  order 
that  Pius  IX.  might  see  to  read  his  decree  of  Papal  in- 
fallibility.   All  this  made  a  profound  and  lasting  im- 
pression upon  the  members  of  the  Council  and  the  whole 
city.    It  was  universally  regarded  as  a  manifestation 
either  of  Divine  approval  or  disapproval  of  that  which 
was  commenced  on  the  first  day  and  consummated  on 
the  last.    Of  course  Infallibilists  took  one  view  of  it  and 
Anti-Infallibilists  the  other.    But  the  untoward  events 
which  followed  in  quick  succession  abundantly  justified 
the  opinion  to  which  the  latter  adhered.  For  "  behold," 
says  Professor  Schaff,  "the  day  after  the  proclamation 
of  the  dogma,  Napoleon  HI.,  the  political  ally  and  sup- 
porter of  Pius  IX.,  unchained  the  furies  of  war,  which 
in  a  few  weeks  swept  away  the  Empire  of  France  and 
the  temporal  throne  of  the  infallible  Pope.    His  own 
subjects  forsook  him,  and  almost  unanimously  voted 
for  a  new  sovereign,  whom  he  had  excommunicated  as 
the  worst  enemy  of  the  Church.    History  records  no 
more  striking  example  of  swift  retribution  of  criminal 
ambition." 


11 


il 


60 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


As  Romanists  speak  of  the  doctrine  of  Papal  infalli- 
bility so  as  to  create  the  impression  that  the  difficulties 
in  the  way  of  its  acceptance  are  not  nearly  so  insupera- 
ble as  is  popularly  supposed  among  Protestants,  we  will 
here  quote  the  decree  and  explain  the  qualifying  clauses 
behind  which  they  take  refuge  when  we  press  them  too 
hard.  After  the  introduction,  which  is  too  long  for 
quotation,  this  declaration  follows: 

"Therefore,  faithfully  adhering  to  the  tradition  re- 
ceived from  the  beginning  of  the  Christian  Faith,  for  the 
glory  of  God  our  Saviour,  the  exaltation  of  the  Catho- 
lic religion,  and  the  salvation  of  Christian  people,  the 
sacred  Council  approving,  we  teach  and  define  that  it  is 
a  dogma  divinely  revealed :  that  the  Roman  PontifiF, 
when  he  speaks  ex-cathedra,  that  is,  when  in  discharge 
of  the  office  of  pastor  and  doctor  of  all  Christians,  by 
virtue  of  his  supreme  Apostolic  authority,  he  defines  a 
doctrine  regarding  faith  or  morals  to  be  held  by  the 
universal  Church,  by  the  Divine  assistance  promised  to 
him  in  blessed  Peter,  is  possessed  of  that  infallibility 
with  which  the  Divine  Redeemer  willed  that  His  Church 
should  be  endowed  for  defining  doctrine  regarding  faith 
or  morals;  and  that,  therefore,  such  definitions  of  the 
Roman  Pontiff*  are  irreformable  of  themselves  and  not 
from  the  consent  of  the  Church.  But  if  anyone — which 
may  God  avert^-presume  to  contradict  this  our  defini- 
tion, let  him  be  anathema. '* 

The'Pope's  infallibility  is  limited  indeed  to  his  ex- 
eathedra  pronunciamentoes  affecting  the  universal 
Church,  But  these  phrases  cannot  be  so  explained  as 
to  exclude  anything  except  his  informal  conversations 
without  making  it  impossible  to  determine  when  his 
words  are  infallible  truth.  Certainly  all  his  allocutions, 
encyclicals,  bulls  and  decrees  are  ex-cathedra  proclama- 
tions, and  as  such  they  must  necessarily,  to  the  Roman 


rAPAL   INFALLIBILITY. 


61 


mind,  affect  the  "  universal  Church."  In  short,  if  the 
Pope  is  ever  infallible,  he  is  always  so  whenever  he  seri- 
ously assumes  the  character  of  a  teacher,  even  though 
it  be  in  the  preaching  of  an  ordinary  sermon. 


The  almost  blasphemous  doctrine  of  Papal  infallibil- 
ity is  partly  accounted  for  (1)  by  the  deep-seated  desire 
of  mankind  for  certitude  in  matters  of  religion,  and  (2) 
by  the  comparative  freedom  of  the  early  Roman  Church 
from  theological  error. 

But,  before  proceeding  to  consider  the  causes  which 
led  to  the  decree,  let  me  observe,  by  way  of  self-justifica- 
tion, that  I  am  not  the  first  to  make  use  of  strong  lan- 
guage in  its  condemnation.    Professor  Schaff",  who  as  an 
historian  enjoyed  an  enviable  reputation  for  sobriety  of 
judgment,  did  not  hesitate  to  say  that,  "if  the  dogma 
is  false,  it  involves  a  blasphemous  assumption,  and 
makes  the  nearest  approach  to  the  fulfillment  of  St. 
Paul's  prophecy  of  the  man  of  sin,  who  'as  God  sitteth 
inthetempleof  God,  showinghimself  off  thatheisGod.' " 
"The  fundamental  error  of  Rome,"  says  the  same  au- 
thor, "is  that  she  identifies  the  true  ideal  Church  of 
Christ  with  the  empirical  Church,  and  the  empirical 
Church  with  the  Romish  Church,  and  the  Romish  Church 
with  the  Papacy,and  the  Papacy  with  the  Pope,  and  at 
last  substitutes  a  mortal  man  for  the  living  Christ."  Be- 
fore  the  Vatican  Council  many  Romanists  took  this 
view.    "  Janus  "  prophesied  that  if  the  Jesuits  had  their 
way,  "In  Rome  itself  the  saying  will  be  verified,  'Thou 
wilt  shudder  thyself  at  thy  likeness  to  God. ' "    And  an 
anonymous  writer  of  great  learning  and  elo'quence,  in  a 
"  Pretended  Speech  of  a  Bishop  in  theCouncil,"  thus  ex- 
presses his  horror  at  what  was  contemplated :    "  Ah,  if 
He  who  sitteth  in  the  heavens  is  disposed  to  make  heavy 


11 


ilf 


f 


62 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


His  hand  upon  us,  as  once  on  Pharaoh,  he  has  no  need 
to  suffer  the  troops  of  Garibaldi  to  drive  us  out  of  the 
Eternal  City ;  he  need  only  let  us  go  on  to  make  Pius  IX. 
a  God,  as  we  have  made  the  blessed  Virgin  a  goddess.'' 
Nor  is  blasphemy  the  only  evil  that  grows  out  of  the 
doctrine  of  infallibility.  For,  if  on  the  one  hand  it  tends 
to  idolatry,  its  opposite  tendency  is  towards  infidelity. 
As  some  one  has  pointed  out,  it  is  a  very  short  way 
from  the  doctrine  that  Pius  IX.  and  Leo  XIII .  were  as 
much  inspired  as  Peter  and  Paul,  to  the  doctrine  that 
E^r  jad fail  wire  no  more  inspred  than  Pius  or  Leo. 


1.  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  men  generally  have 
felt  the  need  of  a  Supreme  and  Omniscient  Ruler  who 
would  authoritatively  say,  "  This  is  the  way ;  walk  ye  in 
it."  Romanists  appeal  to  this  well  nigh  universal  crav- 
ing in  their  efforts  to  commend  the  doctrine  of  Papal 
infkllibility  to  Anglicans  and  other  Protestants.  They 
contrast  the  divisions  of  Protestantism  with  the  unity 
of  Romanism,  and  account  for  our  unhappy  condition 
by  assuming  that,  because  we  are  not  in  communion  with 
the  Pope,  we  are  without  a  reliable  guiding  star,  com- 
pass or  pilot.  Hence,  in  their  opinion,  we  are  like  a  ship 
tossed  about  by  every  wind  of  doctrine,  wrecked  and 
buffeted  to  pieces  upon  the  rocks  of  heresy  and  schism. 
We  shall  see  how  much  there  is  in  this  representation  later. 
For  the  present,  let  us  examine  the  claim  to  definiteness 
of  teaching  in  matters  of  faith  and  morals  with  which 
Ultramontanists  claim  to  be  blessed  in  their  Pontiff. 

They  have  the  canonical  Scriptures.  When  Protes- 
tants accuse  them  of  rejecting  or  ignoring  the  Bible, 
Romanists  contend  that  it  is  either  an  ignorant  or  a 
malicious  misrepresentation.  They  say  that  they  con- 
sider themselves  just  as  much  bound  as  we  do  to  make 


PAPAL  INFALLIBILITY. 


63 


if 


its  revelations  and  precepts  their  rule  of  life,  and  cite 
a  decree  of  the  Council  of  Trent  in  proof  of  this.  Not 
only  are  they  obliged  to  have  reference  to  all  the  books 
which  we  recognize  as  canonically  forming  a  part  of 
Holy  Scripture,  but  to  those  also  which  we  regard  as 
apocryphal.  So  far,  therefore,  as  the  Bible  is  concerned, 
Romanists  have  less  of  definiteness  by  fourteen  books 
than  Protestants. 

The  Denominational  wing  of  Protestantism  does  not 
acknowledge  the  binding  force  of  Ecumenical  enactments, 
but  Romanists  and  Anglicans  do.  We  do  not,  however, 
make  belief  in  them,  except  as  they  pertain  to  the  Creeds, 
necessary  to  salvation.  Here  again  Episcopahans  have 
a  decided  advantage  over  Ultramontanists ;  we  recognize 
only  four,  or  at  most  six.  General  Councils,  because 
these  are  all  in  which  the  whole  of  Christendom  can 
be  said  to  have  been  fairly  represented,  or  that  received 
universal  acceptance  for  their  enactments;  but  there  are 
fourteen  or  fifteen  other  synods,  chiefly  Italian,  which 
are  equally  binding  upon  members  of  the  Roman  Com- 
munion. The  fullest  and  most  reliable  collection  of  the 
Conciliary  decrees  is  said  to  be  a  French  work  in  twenty- 
one  large  folio  volumes.  It  is  perhaps  not  too  much  to 
say  that  every  page  of  this  huge  collection  contains,  on 
an  average,  at  least  some  one  doctrine  upon  which  sal- 
vation is  hinged.  And,  even  if  every  Romanist  could 
read  French,  and  it  were  possible  for  him  to  go  through 
all  the  ponderous  tomes  for  the  purpose  of  making  sure 
that  he  observes  every  precept,  the  dread  of  damnation 
would  nevertheless  still  haunt  him,  because  many  of  the 
canons  which  were  doubtless  coupled  with  the  usual 
anathema  upon  those  who  should  disregard  them,  have 
been  lost  beyond  recovery. 

But  we  have  really  only  begun  to  show  the  hollow- 
ness  of  Rome's  pretension  to  satisfy  our   desire  for 


Hi 


OVU   CONTEOVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


definiteness.    There  remain  the  decrees,  which  no  man 
can  number,  of  the  two  hundred  and  fifty-six  Popes.  As 
the  infallibility  of  the  Bishops  of  Rome  did  not  suggest 
itself  to  anyone  until  about  fifty  of  them  were  in  their 
graves,  and  as  it  was  not  oflScially  proclaimed  to  be 
a  verity  before  the  lapse  of  more  than  eighteen  hundred 
years,  no  great  care  was  taken  to  preserve  their  official 
utterances,    and   hundreds   and   thousands   of  these, 
unquestionably,  have  perished.    During  the  Avignon 
Schism,  which  commenced  in  a.  d.  1379  and  continued 
until  A.  D.  1409,  two  and  sometimes  three  rivals  dis- 
puted the  fictitious  "chair  of  St.  Peter."    It  is  impos- 
sible to  decide  between  their  respective  claims.    Even 
the  great  Councils  held  at  Pisa  and  Constance  could 
not  do  this.    Accordingly  they  deposed  all  the  Popes 
in  turn,  and  elected  a  new  one.    Now  this  is  the  predica- 
ment in  which  Romanists  find  themselves.    They  do 
not  know  which  of  the  claimants  was  the  true  Pontiff, 
and  so  of  course  cannot  tell  whose  decrees  to  obey. 
Moreover,  as  if  for  the  very  purpose  of  creating  as 
much   confusion   and   uncertainty  as  possible.  Papal 
decretals  are  said  to  be  infallible  only  when  spoken 
ex-cathedra.    There  are  no  less  than  eleven  theories 
as  to  when  the  Pope  so  speaks. 

Finally,  to  cap  the  climax  of  Roman  indeflniteness, 
after  the  Bible,  the  Councils,  and  the  Popes,  come  the 
writings  of  the  Saints  and  Doctors  of  both  the  West  and 
the  East.  Even  the  number  of  these  cannot  be  accu- 
rately ascertained  without  laborious  research,  and 
what  remains  of  their  writings  could  scarcely  be  thor- 
oughly read  in  a  long  lifetime  by  one  who  was  at  lib- 
erty to  devote  himself  wholly  to  the  task.  It  has  been 
facetiously  said  of  Duns  Scotus,  one  of  the  Doctors  who 
flourished  in  the  thirteenth  century,  that  "he  wrote 
more  than  ten  men  could  read  in  a  generation  and 


PAPAL   INFALLIBILITY. 


65 


more  than  a  hundred  could  understand ! "  Those  whom 
Romanists  reckon  as  Latin  Fathers  form  two  hundred 
and  twenty-two  thick  volumes ;  the  Greek,  one  hundred 
and  sixty -seven ;  total,  three  hundred  and  eighty-nine. 

The  only  reply  that  Ultramontanists  can  make  to 
our  representation  of  indefiniteness,  is  that  the  com- 
mon people  are  not  expected  to  concern  themselves 
about  all  this.  They  look  to  the  Priests  for  guidance. 
But  the  Priests  are  not  infallible.  Besides,  in  nine  cases 
out  of  ten,  yes,  in  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  out  of 
a  thousand,  they  are  practically  no  better  off  than  the 
Layman,  for,  if  the  doctrine  of  Papal  infallibility  be 
true,  they  do  not,  and  no  man  can,  know  the  millionth 
part  of  that  which  is  necessary  to  salvation. 

Nor  is  there  more  of  doctrinal  stability  than  of  certi- 
tude in  the  Papal  Communion.  Since  the  time  of  the 
illustrious  Bossuet  a  staple  argument  of  Romanists 
against  Protestants  has  been  based  upon  the  variations 
of  belief  among  us.  There  is  no  denying  the  fact  that 
there  is  a  great  deal  of  truth  in  this  charge,  in  so 
far  as  the  non-liturgical  and  non-Episcopal  bodies  of 
Christians  are  concerned.  But  however  this  may  be 
with  respect  to  them,  we  are  safe  in  making  the  asser- 
tion that  the  Anglican  Communion,  in  the  course  of  the 
last  three  hundred  years,  has  manifested  less  of  insta- 
bility than  the  Church  of  Rome.  In  fact,  it  cannot  be 
shown  that  we  have  departed  in  any  important  partic- 
ular from  the  position  which  we  occupied  immediately 
after  the  Reformation.  Our  Prayer  Book,  which  in- 
cludes the  Creeds  and  Catechism,  has  remained  essen- 
tially the  same.  It  certainly  will  not  be  pretended  that 
this  can  be  said  of  the  Roman  book  of  worship  and 
standards  of  doctrine.  Some  of  these  have  been  ma- 
terially changed  within  the  present  generation.  For 
example,  thirty  years  ago  '^Keenan's  Catechism"  was 

C.A.^5 


66 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


recognized  by  the  Komanists  of  Scotland,  Ireland,  Eng- 
land and  America  as  an  eminently  orthodox  exposition 
of  the  things  most  surely  believed  among  them.    It 
was  highly  recommended  by  many  Bishops,  including 
Cardinal  Manning.    All  the  editions  of  this  .popular 
manual  of  instruction  and  controversy  which  appeared 
before  the  year  1870,  contained  the  following  question 
and  answer:  "Q.    Must  not  Catholics  believe  the  Pope 
in  himself  to  be  infallible?  "    "A.    This  is  a  Protestant 
invention:  It  is  no  article  of  the  Catholic  Faith:  No 
Papal  decision  can  bind  under  pain  of  heresy,  unless  it 
be  received  and  prescribed  by  the  teaching  body ;  that  is, 
bythe  Bishops  of  theChurch."   Of  coursethis  with  all  of 
the  same  import  has  been  omitted  and  exactly  the  con- 
trary doctrine  substituted  in  the  post-Vatican  editions. 
It  is  remarkable  that  the  very  history  of  Bossuet's 
great  work  on  the  Variations  among  Protestants,  illus- 
trates how  little  advantage  can   be  gained   for  the 
Roman  Church  by  the  arguments  which  it  contains.    It 
was  approved  by  one  Pope  and  disapproved  by  an- 
other ;  applauded  by  the  Archbishop  of  Rheims,  and 
condemned  by  the  university  of  Louvain ;  censured  by 
the  Sorbonne  in  the  year  1671,  and  in  the  next  century 
declared  by  the  same  learned  body  to  be  a  true  exposi- 
tion of  the  Catholic  Faith.  And  whatever  may  have 
been  the  success  of  this  great  controversialist  against 
those  who  rejected  the  Papal  Communion,  it  is  beyond 
denial  that,  during  the  controversy  concerning  Papal 
infallibility,  he  proved  at  least  as  formidable  against 
the  Italian  section  of  his  own  Church. 

The  bare  list  of  the  heretical  changes  in  the  Roman 
creed  is  enough  to  show  that  the  faith  of  the  Anglican 
Communion  is  by  comparison  like  the  Rock  of  Gibral- 
tar beside  a  sand  heap.  In  A.  d.  754  the  Church  of 
Rome  introduced  the  worship  of  Saints;  in  a.  d.  787 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


67 


she  authorized  the  use  of  images  and  relics  in  religious 
worship ;  in  A.  d.  1123  she  forbade  the  Clergy  to  marry ; 
in  A.  D.  1215  she  proclaimed  the  supremacy  of  the  Pope 
and  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation ;  in  A.  d.  1414 
she  withheld  the  Cup  from  the  Laity;  in  a.  d.  1438  the 
lucrative  doctrines  of  purgatory  and  indulgences  were 
invented;  in  a.d.  1439  it  was  first  officially  declared  that 
Christ  instituted  seven  Sacraments;  in  a.  d.  1854  the 
Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  Mary  was 
promulgated ;  and  in  a.  d.  1870  the  infallibility  of  the 
Pope  was  asserted.    "Janus''  calls  attention  to  thefact 
that  "  the  very  names  the  Popes  assumed  or  accepted, 
mark  the  broad  division  between  the  earlier  and  new 
Gregorian  Papacy.    To  the  end  of  the  twelfth  century 
they  had  called  themselves  Vicars  of  Peter,  but  since 
Innocent   III.  this  title   was  superseded  by  Vicar  of 
Christ.    In  fact,  the  gulf  between  the  position  and  rights 
of  a  Gregory  I.,  and  the  pretensions  and  plenary  power 
of  a  Gregory  IX.,  or  between  a.  d.  600  and  a.  d.  1230, 
is  as  wide  as  from  Peter  to  Christ."    Surely,  of  all  Chris- 
tians our  Roman  brethren  have  the  least  of  doctrinal 
certitude  and  stability. 

The  author  of  an  able  article  in  one  of  our  maga- 
zines is  right  when  he  says :  "  There  is  no  royal  road  to 
certainty ;  no  organon  for  the  summary  extinction  of 
doubts.  As  much  in  the  sphere  of  religion,  as  in  the 
social  and  political  domains,  infallibility  and  perfection 
are  mere  dreams  of  the  imagination."  And,  after  all,  it 
is  questionable  whether  the  definiteness  of  which  Ro- 
manists make  so  much  and  have  so  little,  would  be  de- 
sirable, even  if  it  were  attainable.  "It  would,"  as  the 
Bishop  of  Vermont  observes,  "have  saved  the  Church 
much  perplexity,  much  discussion,  if  she  had  been  able 
to  refer  her  questions  and  doubts  as  to  points  of  faith 
and  morals  to  an  infallible  guide  and  teacher.    But  she 


ill 


llO' 


OXm  CJOJ^TROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


did  not.  And  We  can  see  what  she  would  have  lost  had 
Bhe  been  able  to  do  80.  Out  of  all  the  discussion,  debate, 
and  controversy,  in  Council  and  in  treatise,  the  weigh- 
ing of  evidence,  the  pondering  of  arguments,  through 
much  perplexity,  in  spite  of  some  mistakes  and  blun- 
ders, the  Church  advances,  like  the  individual,  in  the 
knowledge  of  God,  and  in  an  intelligent  apprehension  of 
His  mind  and  will.  We  gain  first  a  practical  working 
assurance,  then  a  growing  certainty.  God,  who  surely 
hates  sin  more  than  He  hates  error,  wills  us  to  be  freed 
from  both ;  but  as  He  has  not  made  sin  impossible,  so 

neither  error." 

But  Anglicans  are  not  left  quite  so  hopelessly  adnft 
as  Ultramontanists  represent.  For  the  Bible  is  our 
guiding  star,  history  our  compass,  and  conscience  our 
pilot.  If  these  be  faithfully  followed  there  can  be  no 
doubt  that,  though  for  one  reason  and  another  we  may 
now  and  then  deviate  more  or  less  widely  from  the  true 
course,  we  shall  nevertheless  drop  anchor  at  the  last  in 
the  haven  where  we  would  be. 

2.  The  development  of  the  ddetrfne  of  Papal  infalli- 
bility is  also  due  in  part  to  the  fact  that,  during  the  first 
centuries,  the  Bishops  of  Kome,  though  by  no  means 
exempt  from  error,  were  singularly  free  from  heresy. 
The  great  majority  of  the  Popes  held  unswervingly  to 
the  Faith  as  it  had  been  handed  down  to  them  in  succes- 
sion from  the  Apostles  or  defined  by  the  Ecumenical 
synods.  As  compared  with  the  other  chief  Sees,  Rome 
certainly  had  a  well-earned  and  enviable  reputation  for 
orthodoxy.  It  is  therefore  not  surprising  that  the  im- 
pression early  began  to  prevail  that  the  Faith,  though 
it  should  come  to  be  everywhere  else  corrupted,  would 
always  be  kept  whole  and  undefiled  at  Rome.    Some  of 


i!i' 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


69 


the  early  Fathers  who  lived  at  a  distance  from  Rome, 
save  expression  to  this  conviction.    Ultramontanists 
make  a  great  deal  of  such  well-merited  eompliments 
Thev  see  in  them  an  evidence  that  the  mfallibility  ot 
the  Pope  was  recognized  from  the  beginning.    But  this 
is  far  from  having  been  true.    For  long  centuries,  no 
one  dreamed  of  accounting  for  the   comparative  im- 
munity of  the  Roman  Church  from  error,  upon  the 
hypothesis  of  infallibility.    The  reason  they  uniformly 
gave  for  her  good  fortune  was  the  fact  that  Rome, 
being  the  capital  of  the  empire,  was  the  rendezvous 
of  Christians  from  every  part  of  the  world  who  bore 
testimony  to  the  Faith,  as  it  was  taught  in  their  respec- 
tive Churches.   Hence,  if  any  error  of  doctrine  arose,  it 
was  promptly  detected  and  protested  against. 

The  comparative  freedom  of  the  Church  of  Rome 
from  heresy  is  also  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that  she 
was  so  far  removed  from  the  scenes  of  battle  between 
the  orthodox  and  heterodox.    It  is  one  thing  to  stand 
off  at  a  safe  distance  looking  on,  and  quite  another  to 
take  part  in  the  fray.    The  Faith  was  formulated  and 
defended  by  the  Greeks.  The  Latins  accepted  the  Creeds 
and  preserved  them  as  they  came  from  the  Councils,  but 
they  had  practically  nothing  to  do  with  the  making  of 
them.    If  the  Bishops  of  Rome  are  really  the  Divinely 
appointed  infallible  teachers  of  mankind  in  the  Chris- 
tian Faith,  the  fact  that  they  had  so  little  to  do  with 
the  formulation   and   promulgation  of  the   Catholic 
Creeds,  is  inexplicable.  Nor  can  the  absence  of  any  ref- 
erence in  the  universally  accepted  Creeds  to  the  doc- 
trine in  question,  be  satisfactorily  explained  upon  the 
Roman  hypothesis.    If  it  were  correct,  after  the  article 
on  the  "  One  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,"  this  would 
have  followed:    -And  I  believe  in  the  Pope  of  Rome, 
the  successor  of  Peter  and  infallible  Vicar  of  Christ. 


ti 


70 


OITB   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


li    i 

r 

V' 


h ' 


But  thou^b  file  Popes  were  really  exceptionally 
orthodox,  nevertheless  their  doctrinal  errors  were 
numerous  and  serious  enough  clearly  to  disprove  the 
infallibility  which  in  our  generation  has  been  decreed  of 
them.  In  fact,  the  dogma  will  not  at  all  stand  the  test 
of  history.  The  occupants  of  the  so-called  '*  chair  of 
Peter"  have  all  along  been  guilty  of  as  many  errors, 
follies  and  sins  as  ordinary  mortals  would  have  been 
under  similar  circumstances.  Even  in  their  doctrinal 
decisions,  which  were  certainly  ** ex-cathedra"  utter- 
ances, they  have  frequently  contradicted  each  other; 
and  some  of  them  have  taught  downright  heresy. 

(1)  Innocent  I.  and  Gelasius  I.,  who  occupied  the 
Papal  chair  in  the  fifth  century,  dogmatically  main- 
tained that  infants  who  died  without  receiving  the 
Holy  Communion,  were  without  doubt  damned.  The 
Council  of  Trent,  which  assembled  a.  d.  1545,  about  a 
thousand  years  after  their  time,  with  a  Pope  at  its 
head,  rightly  condemned  and  anathematized  this  mon- 
strous teaching. 

(2)  Pope  Victor,  A.  d.  192,  approved  of  Montanism, 
and  afterwards  condemned  it.  This  heresy  consisted  in 
the  belief  that  its  promoter,  Montanus,  by  virtue  of  a 
revelation,  was  to  introduce  a  new  dispensation  of  the 
Spirit  superior  to  that  of  Christ  and  his  Apostles. 

(3)  Zephyrinus,  A.  d.  201-19,  and  Callistus,  a.  d. 
219-23,  two  Bishops  of  Rome,  held  and  taught  the 
Patripassian  heresy,  which  is  that  God  the  Father  be- 
came incarnat;e,  and  suffered  with  His  Son. 

(4)  Marcellinus,  A.  d.  296-303,  was  an  idolater.  He 
entered  the  temple  of  Vesta  and  offered  incense  to  that 
goddess.  Romanists  excuse  him'  on  the  ground  of  in- 
timidation and  human  infirmity.  To  this  Protestants 
reply  that  if  this  Pope  had  been  really  the  Vicar  of  Christ, 
he  might  have  died,  but  could  not  have  apostatized. 


^t'i 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


71 


(5)  Liberius,  A.  d.  352,  for  the  sake  of  being  recalled 
from  exile,  and  reinstated  in  his  See,  consented  to  the 
condemnation  of  Athanasius,  and  openly  professed 
Arianism.  This  heresy  consisted  in  the  denial  of  the 
Divinity  of  Christ.  The  apostasy  of  Liberius  sufficed, 
through  the  whole  of  the  Middle  Ages,  for  a  proof  that 
Popes  as  well  as  other  people  could  fall  into  heresy. 

(6)  Zosimus,  a.  d.  417,  at  first  indorsed  as  orthodox 
Pelagius  and  Celestius,  who  denied  the  fall  and  the 
necessity  of  Divine  help  in  order  to  attain  salvation. 
Afterwards  Augustine  and  the  African  Bishops  com- 
pelled Zosimus  to  follow  the  example  of  his  predecessor, 
Innocent  I.,  in  condemning  these  heretics. 

(7)  Gregory  I.,  a.d.  578-90  condemned  as  antichrist 
anyone  who  assumed  the  title  Universal  Bishop ;  Boni- 
face III.,  A.  D.  607,  obtained  this  title  from  the  parricide 

Emperor,  Phocas.  ,  ^.t.  i.  i 

(8)  Pelagius,  in  the  sixth  century,  and  Nicholas,  m 
the  ninth,  made  contradictory  decisions  upon  the  form 
of  words  necessary  to  valid  Baptism.  The  earlier  Pop^ 
declared  that  it  is  essential  that  the  Sacrament  should 
be  administed  in  the  name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son 
and  of  the  Holy  Ghost ;  and  the  later,  that  m  the  name 
ofChrist  alone  is  sufficient.  ^-n    ^ 

(9)  Stephen,  about  the  year  a.  d.  750,  officially  de- 
clared that  a  marriage  with  a  slave  girl  might  be  dis- 
solved and  another  contracted .  In  this  he  contradicted 
his  predecessors,  who  had  uniformly  decreed  such  mar- 
riages indissoluble. 

(10)  InA  D  824,  the  Bishops  assembled  m  synod  at 

Paris  spoke  without  hesitation  of  the  "absurdities"  of 
Pope  Adrian,  who,  they  said,  had  commanded  an 
heretical  worship  of  images.  ^ 

(11)  Adrian  H.,  A.  d.  867-72,  declared  civil  mar- 
riages valid;  Pius  VII,,  A,p,  1800-23,  conaepined  tjiem. 


I 


M 


72 


OUR   CONTBOVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


(12)  Celestine  III.,  A.  d.  1191,  pronounced  the  mar- 
riage tie  broken  when  either  party  became  heretical. 
Innocent  III.,  a.  d.  1198,  annulled  this  decree,  and  Adrian 
VI.,  A.  D.  1522,  declared  that  it  was  a  pernicious  heresy. 

(13)  Stephen  VI.,  a.  d.  885,  caused  the  body  of  For- 
mosus  to  be  disentombed,  clothed  with  Pontifical  robes, 
and  cast  into  the  Tiber,  after  he  had  cut  off  from  it  the 
fingers  with  which  he  had  given  the  benediction,  pro- 
nouncing him  perjured  and  illegitimate.  Stephen  himself 
was  afterwards  imprisoned  by  the  people,  poisoned  and 
strangled.  His  successor  restored  the  body  of  For- 
mosus  to  Christian  burial,  and,  at  a  council  presided 
over  by  John  IX.,  A.  d.  898,  the  Pontificate  of  For- 
mosus  was  declared  valid  and  all  his  acts  confirmed. 

(14)  The  doctrine  that  Christ's  body  is  sensibly 
touched  by  the  hands  and  broken  by  the  teeth,  in  the 
Eucharist— an  error  rejected  by  the  whole  Church— was 
affirmed  by  Nicholas  II.,  at  the  Synod  of  Kome,  in  A.  d. 
1059. 

.  (15)  Paschal  II.,  A.  d.  1088-99,  and  Eugenius  III., 
A.  D.  1145-52,  authorized  dueling;  Julius  II.,  A.  d. 
1509,  and  Pius  IV.,  a.  d.  1560,  forbade  it. 

(16)  Eugenius  IV.,  a.  d.  1431-39,  approved  the  Coun- 
cil of  Basle  and  the  restoration  of  the  Chalice  to  the 
Bohemian  Church;  Pius  II.,  A.  d.  1658,  revoked  this 
concession. 

(17)  Coming  down  to  the  time  when  the  doctrine  of 
Papal  infallibility  had  been  quite  fully  developed,  and 
become  the  shibboleth  of  the  Jesuits  and  of  the  dominant 
school  in  the  Koman  Communion,  we  have  the  amusing 
experience  of  Sixtus  V.,  a.  d.  1585-90,  in  connection  with 
the  issue  of  his  revised  edition  of  the  Latin  translation 
of  the  Holy  Scriptures.  Imagining  that  the  immunity 
from  error  which  he  believed  he  had  inherited  as  Pope 
from  St.  Pet^r,  would  enable  him  to  produce  an  abso- 


^ 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


73 


lutely  correct  rendering,  he  undertook,  with  much  en- 
thusiasm,  the  task  of  doing  the  worid  this  invaluable 
service.    In  due  time  his  revision  of  the  Latin  Bible 
came  forth  from  the  press  with  a  great  flourish  of 
trumpets.    The  bull  by  which  it  was  introduced,  declared 
that,  inasmuch  as  it  had  been  corrected  from  beginning 
to  end  by  his  own  infallible  hand,  it  was  absolutely  fault- 
less, and'must  supersede  all  imperfect  renderings  as  rap- 
idly as  copies  could  be  supplied,  and  that  in  reprints 
the  greatest  care  must  be  taken  to  prevent  the  slightest 
deviation  from   the  edition  bearing  his  imprimatur. 
Printers  and  editors  who  should  be  either  so  careless  or 
presumptuous  as  to   change  so  much   as  a  syllable, 
were  then  and  there  excommunicated.    Surely  no  one 
will  pretend  that  the  Pontiff  was  not  speaking  ex-catAe- 
dra  when  he  issued  his  version  of  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
and  anathematized  all  who  would  not  recognize  and  ad- 
mit its  absolute  perfection.    In  view  of  all  this,  the  sur- 
prise and  chagrin  of  "His  Holiness"  may  be  imagined 
when  the  scholars  about  his  court  represented  that, 
after  a  somewhat  hasty  examination  of  his  work,  they 
felt  obliged  to  call  his  attention  to  more  than  two 
thousand  glaring  errors  which,  upon  reference  to   the 
compositor's  copy,  were  found  to  be  in  his  handwriting, 
and  to  say  that,  unless  the  whole  edition  could  be  called 
in  and  suppressed,  it  would  undoubtedly  prove  fatal  to 
the  doctrine  of  Papal  infallibiUty .    Of  course  some  way 
out  of  the  difficulty  had  to  be  found.    Among  the  sug- 
gested schemes,  the  one  adopted  was  to  ask  for  the  re- 
turn  of  the  copies  which  had  been  sent  out,  upon  the 
ground  of  the  discovery  of  some  mistakes  which  had 
crept  in  through  the  carelessness  of  the  printers.    This 
apology  appeared  in  the  Pope's  preface  to  the  new 
edition,  in  which  the  errors  of  this  infallible  successor  of 
gt.  Peter  were  corrected.    That  Sixtps  was  guilty  of  the 


I 


I 


rf,  ■    : 


i. 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

multitudinous  inaccuracies  and  base  deceit  of  which  we 
have  spoken,  we  know  on  the  authority  of  no  less  a  per- 
sonage than  the  learned  Bellarmine,  upon  whom  the 
Pope  chiefly  relied  for  extrication  from  the  embarrass- 
ing situation  in  which  he  found  himself.    In  his  autobi- 
ography the  great  Cardinal  congratulates  himself  on 
having  thus  requited  the  Pontiff  with  good  for  evil ;  for 
he  had  put  Bellarmine's  work  concerning  controversies  on 
the  Index,  because  he  had  not  maintained  the  direct,  but 
only  the  indirect,  dominion  of  the  Pope  over  the  whole 
world.     **  And  now,"  says  one  of  the  Koman  Catholic 
authors  of  the  Pope  and  the  Council,  *^  followed  a  fresh 
mishap.     The  autobiography,  which  was  kept  in  the 
archives  of  the  Koman  Jesuits,  got  known  in  Rome 
through  several  transcripts.     Hereupon  Cardinal  Az- 
zolini  urged  that,  as  Bellarmine  had   insulted  three 
Popes  and  exhibited  two  as  liars,  namely,  Gregory  XIV., 
and  Clement  VIII.,  his  work  should  be  suppressed  and 
burnt,  and  the  strictest  secrecy  inculcated  about  it." 
I  have  dwelt  somewhat  at  length  upon  this  instance 
of  Papal  fallibility,  because  it  seems  to  me  that  in  it- 
self  it  is  sufficient  to  explode  the  Vatican  dogma  of  in- 

fallibility. 

(18)  But  this  unfortunate  Bible,  which  as  we  have 
seen  had  already  scored  above  two  thousand  points 
against  the  Papal  doctrine,  was  destined  to  make  still 
another.  For  in  his  bull  announcing  its  publication, 
Sixtus  strongly  recommended  the  general  study  of  the 
Holy  Scriptures;  but  Pius  VII.,  a.  d.  1800,  severely 
condemns  the  reading  of  them  by  any  except  the  Clergy. 

(19)  Perhaps,  after  all,  nothing  can  show  the  ab- 
surdity of  the  Papal  claims  to  infallibility  quite  so  well 
as  the  spuriousness  of  the  relics,  which,  from  time  to 
time,  the  Popes,  directly  or  indirectly,  pronounced  to  be 
genuine.    Even  the  gravest  enumeration  of  those  which 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


TO 


have  been  preserved  at  Kome,  sounds  like  profane  jest- 
ing.    Among  them  are: 

"  The  sponge  tinged  with  the  blood  of  our  Lord. 

"  The  spearhead  which  pierced  His  side. 

*'  The  pillar  at  which  He  was  scourged. 

"  Thorns  from  His  crown. 

"  Nails  from  His  cross. 

"  The  Infant  Saviour's  cradle. 

"  The  table  at  which  the  Last  Supper  was  eaten. 

"The  cloth  with  which  Christ  wiped  His  disciples' feet. 

"Blood  from  Christ's  side  and  the  drops  which  fell 
from  His  brow."  Among  miscellaneous  treasures  of  the 
same  sort  are  showed  : 

"  A  stone  cast  at  St.  Stephen. 

"  Part  of  Aaron's  rod. 

"  Manna  from  the  wilderness. 
•    "  The  espousal  ring  of  the  Blessed  Virgin. 

"A  piece  of  money  received  by  Judas."    Absurd  as 
all  this  is,  it  is  really  no  more  so  than  the  relics  of 
which  an  extended  account  is  given  in  the  New  York 
"Times"  of  Friday,  September  20,  1895.    Under  the 
head-line  ^'Belies  of  Many  Saints"  are  described  the 
achievements   of  a  Brooklyn  lady,  who  organized  a 
pilcrrimage  to  Lourdes,  where,  at  the  famous  grotto  of 
Ma^'ssavievelle,  the  Virgin  Mary  is  believed  byRomamsts 
to  have  revealed  herself  repeatedly  to  a  peasant  girl 
in  A  D  1858.    The  spot  at  which  this  occurred  is  now 
resorted  to  bv  multitudes  of  pilgrims  from  all  parts  of  the 
world     It  is  marked  by  a  large  Church,  consecrated  a.  d. 
1876  in  the  presence  of  thirty-five  Cardinals  and  other 
hioh  representatives  of  the  Pope.  The  Holy  Father  was 
so  much  pleased  with  the  number  and  zeal  of  the  Ameri- 
can pilgrims  that  he  favored  their  fair  leader  with  a 
"  reliquary."    ''  In  appearance,"  says  the  ''  Times '  cor- 
respondent, "it  is  a  silver  frame,  measuring  five  or  six 


7§ 


OFR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


inches  from  top  to  bottom.  In  the  oval  opening  are 
exposed  the  relics,  each  very  tiny  and  marked  with  its 
Latin  name.  The  back  of  the  oval  can  be  removed,  and 
underneath  it  is  the  seal  of  the  Holy  See,  firmly  affixed 
in  red  wax,  to  show  that  the  contents  remain  intact  as 
first  arranged.  A  paper  accompanies  the  reliqnary, 
giving  the  names  of  the  relics  and  vouching  for  their 
genuineness.    This  is  the  list  given  in  oi'der : 

'*  Veil  of  the  Blessed  Virgin. 

"Cloakof  St.  Joseph. 

"  Bone  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul. 

*'Bone  of  St.  John  and  St.  Andrew. 

'•'Boneof  St.  Philip  Neri. 

"  Bone  of  St.  Augustine. 

*'  Bone  of  St.  Domiiiick. 

"  Bone  of  St.  Francis  de  Sales. 

'*  Bone  of  St.  Alphonsus. 

"Habit  of  St.  Francis  of  Assisi.  "Other  valuable 
relics  which  were  given  to in  Rome  were: 

"A  piece  of  the  true  cross. 

"A  piece  of  thorn  from  the  crown  of  thorns. 

"A  piece  of  the  Saviour's  winding  sheet. 

"A  bone  of  St.  Francis  Assisi. 

"A  bone  of  St.  Clair  of  Assisi. 

"A  relic  of  the  habit  of  St.  Cecilia.  The  first  three 
were  in  one  reliquary.  The  piece  of  the  cross  is  in  the 
form  of  a  tiny  cross,  and  the  other  relics  are  on  either 
side  below  it.'  The  two  bone  relics  are  in  still  another 
reliquary,  and  the  piece  of  the  habit  of  St.  Cecilia  on  a 
sheet  of  paper  and  stamped  with  a  seal.  Proper  papers 
accompanied  them  all." 

(20)  But  passing  over  the  above  mentioned  relics  we 
fix  upon  the  famous  house  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  in  Lo- 
retto,  because,  upon  the  whole,  it  may  fairly  be  said  to 
put  the  finishing  touches  to  this  class  of  Roman  absurd- 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


77 


ities.     In  order  to  escape  the  accusation  of  drawing 
upon   my  imagination,  I  shall  give  the  story  in  the 
words  of  Professor  Salmon,  whose  reputation  for  learn- 
ing and  candor  will  shield  him  from  suspicion.    "You 
have  all,  I  dare  say,  heard  the  story  of  the  holy  house 
at  Loretto.  The  Virgin  Mary's  house  at  Nazareth,  when 
the  land  fell  into  the  possession  of  unbelievers,  and  wor- 
shipers  could  no  longer  resort  to  it,  was  carried  by  the 
angels  across  the  seas  on  the9thof  May,  1291— forllike 
to  be  exact— and,  after  taking  three  temporary  resting 
places,  finally  settled  down  at  Loretto  in  the  year  1295. 
There,  on  the  credit  of  so  great  a  miracle,  it  attracted 
many  pilgrims,  and  was  by  them  enriched  with  abun- 
dant gifts.    Several  Popes  pledged  their  credit  to  the 
proof  of  the  story,  and  rewarded  pious  visitors  with 
indulgences.    I  possess  a  history  of  the  holy  house, 
written  by  Turselliuus,  a  Jesuit,  and  printed  at  Loretto 
itself  in  1837,  from  which  I  find  that  the  story  is  proved 
by  such  irrefragable  evidence  that  no  one  can  doubt  it 
who  is  not  prepared  to  deny  the  power  and  Providence 
of  God,  and  to  remove  all  faith  in   the  testimony  of 
man.    Mr.  Ffoulkes,  whose  turn  of  mind  was  such  that 
he  seemed  to  find  it  as  hard  as  the  holy  house  itself  to 
find   a  resting   place,   either   among    Protestants  or 
Roman  Catholics,  neither  accepted  this  story  without 
inquiry,  as  might  a  thorough -going  Roman  Catholic, 
nor  rejected  it  without  inquiry,  as  might  a  thorough- 
going  Protestant.    He   took   the    trouble   of    going 
both  to  Loretto  and  to  Nazareth,  and  making  labori- 
ous investigations  on  the  spot;  and  the  result  of  his 
inquiry  was,  that  he  came  back  thoroughly  convinced 
of  the  fictitious  character  of  the  Santa  Casa  notwith-^ 
standing  the  privileges  bestowed  by  so  many  Popes.'' 
(21)  In  the  eighth  century,  Virgil,  Bishop  of  Salzburg, 
was  condemned  by  PopeZachary,  because  he  maintained 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

tlie  spherical  form  of  the  earth,  and  the  existence  of  the 
antipodes;  he  is  now  a  saint  of  the  Roman  calendar. 
In  the  thirteenth  century,  Roger  Bacon  was  imprisoned 
as  an  astrologer,  and  dealer  in  unlawful  arts ;  his  ap- 
peal to  Nicholas  IV.  only  procured  him  a  closer  captiv- 
ity. A  hundred  years  later  it  was  still  the  same.  Sev- 
eral Popes  and  their  representatives  in  the  infamous 
Inquisition  condemned  Galileo's  system  of  astronomy, 
and  in  contradiction  to  it  asserted  that  the  sun  goes 
round  the  world  every  twenty -four  hours.  Every  good 
Roman  Cathohc  was  forbidden  even  to  read  a  book 
which  taught  the  mobility  of  the  earth.  The  poor 
astronomer  escaped  the  stake  by  confessing,  through 
extreme  fear  of  a  horrible  death,  what  he  never  believed, 
that  the  Church  was  right  and  he  wrong.  It  is  needless 
to  say  that  the  Popes  and  Doctors  have  long  since 
abandoned  the  ground  which  their  predecessors  occu- 
pied, and  have  come  over  to  Galileo's  way  of  thinking. 
Kepler  would  have  fared  no  better  than  his  friend 
Galileo,  had  he  lived  at  Pisa  instead  of  Gratz;  nor 
Newton,  if  his  lot  had  not  been  fortunately  cast  in  Eng- 
land, and  a  little  too  late  for  such  interference. 

(22)  Adrian  I.,  a.  d.,  772-95,  sent  a  long  letter  to 
the  Council  in  defense  of  the  use  of  images.  It  contains 
the  following  story  in  support  of  his  argument :  Con- 
stantine  was  at  first  a  persecutor  of  the  Christians,  and 
put  many  of  them  to  death— among  others  his  own  wife 
—for  refusing  to  sacrifice  to  the  gods  of  Rome.  He 
was  struck  with  leprosy,  and,  in  order  to  effect  a  cure,  it 
was  prescribed  that  he  should  bathe  in  infant's  blood. 
The  mothers  of  the  children  who  were  destined  to  fur- 
nish this  very  uninviting  bath,  however,  prevailed  on 
him  by  their  tears  to  give  up  the  idea,  and  he  was 
warned  in  a  heavenly  vision  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul 
to  appij  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  Sylvester,  wlio  had 


,L 


I' 


1>APAL    INFALLIBILITir. 


79 


been  driven  by  the  persecution  to  take  refuge  on  Mount 
Soracte.    Constantine  accordingly  sent  for  Sylvester, 
found  him  as  described,  and  in  short  carried  out  the 
whole  programme  of  the  dream  with  the  happy  result 
of  a  complete  cure.     He  then  asked,  who  those  gods, 
Peter  and  Paul,  might  be.    Sylvester  replied,  they  were 
not  gods,  but  the  servants  of  Christ.    Constantine  then 
asked,  whether  there  were  any  images  of  them  pre- 
served ;  and  when  the  Pope  sent  for  paintings  of  the 
two  Apostles,  and  showed  them,  the  emperor  at  once 
recognized  them  as  the  persons  who  had  appeared  to 
him  in  the  vision.    This  was  one  of  Pope  Adrian's  au- 
thorities for  the  use  of  images.    Now  it  is  to  be  observed 
that  Sylvester  was  not  Pope  until  the  persecution  was 
ended;   that  Constantine  never  persecuted  in   Italy; 
that,  on  the  contrary,  his  coming  to  Italy  put  a  stop 
to  the  persecution ;  that  he  was  not  baptized  by  Sylves- 
ter, nor  baptized  at  all  until  his  last  illness,  and  then  at 
Nicomedia,  most  probably  by  Eusebius ;  that  there  is 
no  notice  in  history  of  his  ever  having  been  afflicted  by 
leprosy,  and  it  is  most  incredible  that  he  ever  was. 
The  infallibility  of   Adrian,  which  ought  to   be  the 
voucher  for  this  story,  involves  here  the  veracity  of  the 
two  Apostles,  who  are  both  made  to  assert  in  the  vision 
what  was  not  true.   The  ridiculous  legend  was  probably 
taken  from  some  spurious  biography  of  the  Popes.    Did 
Adrian  know  the  worth  of  his  authority  or  not?    The 
answer  either  way  is  fatal  to  the  dogma  of  Papal  Infalli- 
bility. 

(23)  A  number  of  the  Popes  have  proved  themselves 
incompetent  to  distinguish  spurious  from  genuine  docu- 
ments. Adrian  I.  and  others  cited  the  donation  of  Con- 
stantine; Nicholas  I.  the  acts  of  the  apocryphal  Council 
of  Sinuessa ;  and  his  successors  for  ages  the  decretal  let- 
ters.   The  work  of  Gratian,  which  was  corrected  by  a 


1*  < 


if 


80 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


commissfoii  appointed  by  Pius  IV.,  and  published  with 
confirmation  by  Gregory  XIII.,  is  full  of  coarse  and 
stupid  forgeries,  which  needed  no  supernatural  gift  to 
detect.  Sometimes  they  mistook  one  writing  for  another, 
as  when  Zosimus  and  others  produced  the  Sardican 
canons  for  the  Nicene,  which  Baronius,  Bellarmine,  and 
others  ascribe  to  ignorance,  as  a  less  injurious  imputa- 
tion than  fraud.  Innocent  III.  quoted  for  Holy  Scrip- 
ture a  passage  written  by  Augustine.  Books  to  which 
the  Papal  sanction  is  pledged  as  fully  as  possible  con- 
tain undeniable  misstatements.  Thus  the  Roman  Cate- 
chism, after  describing  the  ceremonies  used  in  Baptism, 
such  as  the  use  of  salt  and  the  chrism,  adds  that  they 
were  instituted  by  the  Holy  Apostles. 

(24)  But  the  case  of  Pope  Honorius,  A.  d.  625-38,  is 
generally  regarded  as  affording  the  most  conclusive  and 
unanswerable  historical  evidence  against  this  decree  of 
the  Vatican  Council.  The  facts  which  historians,  hav- 
ing access  to  orginal  sources  of  information,  tell  us  with 
practical  unanimity  are  the  following:  (1)  Honorius 
taught  in  two  ex-cathedra  letters  the  Monothelite 
heresy,  that  is,  that  the  human  will  was  wanting  in 
Christ,  and  that  therefore  He  was  wholly  possessed  and 
influenced  by  the  Divine  will.  (2)  The  doctrine,  which 
was  a  denial  of  our  Lord's  perfect  manhood,  was  con- 
demned ;  and  Pope  Honorius,  as  one  of  the  chief  heresi- 
archs,  was  excomnuinicated  by  the  generally  accepted 
sixth  Ecumenical  Council  assembled  at  Constantinople  in 
A.  D.  080.  *'  Not  a  single  voice  was  raised  in  his  defense. 
Even  the  Papal  Legates  had  nothing  to  say."  The 
anathema  which  accompanied  the  excommunication 
of  the  Pontiff,  was  repeated  at  the  seventh  and  eighth 
Councils,  which  were  held  respectively  in  A.  d.  787, 
and  A.  D.  869.  (3)  All  the  successors  of  Honorius  down 
to  the  eleventh  century,  included  him  in  the  eternal 


I 


i  "i 


PAPAL    INFALLIBILITY. 


81 


anathema  which  they  pronounced  upon  the  autliors  and 
abettors  of  the  Monothelite  heresy.    They  undertook  to 
see  that  he  was  condemned   in  the  West  as  well  as 
throughout  the  East  and  that  his  name  was  struck  out 
of  the  Liturgv.    Pope  Leo  II.,  in  a  letter  to  theemperor, 
stronglv  confirmed  the  decree  of  the  Council,  and  de- 
nounced his  predecessor  Honorius  as  one  who  endeav- 
ored by  profane  treason  to  overthrow  the  immaculate 
Faith  of  the  Roman  Church.    The  same  Pope  says,  m  a 
letter  to  the  Spanish  Bishops:  '^  With  eternal  damna- 
tion have  we  punished  Theodore,  Cyrus,  Sergius,  to- 
gether with  Honorius,  who  did  not  extinguish  at  the  very 
beginnino;  the  fiame  of  heretical  doctrine."    Thus,  after 
A.  D.  680,  for  three  hundred  years  the  Popes  formally 
and  publicly  recognized  the  right  of  General  Councils  to 
condemn  and  depose  any  of  them  that  might  fall  into 
error  of  doctrine.    There  is,  therefore,  no  getting  around 
the  fact  that  during  the  first  one  thousand  years  both 
Councils  and  Popes  believed  in  the  fallibility  of  the  Bish- 
ops of  Rome,  in  flat  contradiction  to  the  dogma  promul- 
gated at  the  Vatican  in  a.  d.  1870.    As  was  said  in  one  of 
the  many  able  protests  by  Romanists  against  the  scheme 
of  the  Pope  and  the  Jesuits:    ^'This  one  fact,  that  a 
Great  Council,  universally  received  afterwards  without 
hesitation  throughout  the  Church,  and  presided  over  by 
Papal  legates,  pronounced  the  dogmatic  decision  of  a 
Pope  heretical,  and  anathematized  him  by  name  as  a 
heretic,  is  a  proof,  clear  as  the  sun  at  noonday,  that  the 
notion  of  any  peculiar  enlightenment  or  inerrancy  of  the 
Popes  was  then  utterly  unknown  to  the  whole  Church.'' 
(25)  Finally,  we  have  what  in  itself  should  settle  the 
question,  namely,  the  confession  of  three  of  the  Popes. 
John  XXn.,A.D.*  131 6-34,  and  Gregory  XI.,A.D.1370-78, 

when  dying,  confessed  their  liability  to  error,  and  sub- 
mitted all  their  statements,  whether  spoken  or  written, 


C.A.— 6 


\.l 


1^  ' 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 

to  the  judgment  of  tlie  Ctmrcli.  Pius  IV.,  a.  d.  1559-65, 
declared,  in  consistory,  that  he  himself,  like  his  predeces- 
sors, was  fallible.  Perhaps  the  most  remarkable  case 
was  that  of  Adrian  VI.,  A.  d.  1522-23,  who,  while  he 
was  a  professor  at  Louvain,  maintained  that  the  Pope 
might  err  in  questions  of  faith,  and  support  heresy  by 
decisions  and  decretal  letters.  This  is  his  declaration : 
**It  is  certain  that  the  Pope  can  err  even  in  matters  of 
faith,  asserting  heresy  in  his  determination  or  decree ; 
for  many  of  the  Roman  Pontiffs  were  heretics."  He  did 
not  retract  these  words  after  becoming  Pope,  but  re- 
printed them  at  Rome  in  the  year  1522.  There  were 
certain  Cardinals  to  whom  this  was  a ''hard  saying,'' 
and,  as  the  book  had  been  published  and  republished  in 
Rome  itself,  and  had  become  extremely  popular,  they 
urged  the  Pope  to  reconsider  his  judgment.  This  he 
nobly  refused  to  do.  "His  opinion,"  he  said,  "had  al- 
ways been  this  in  the  case  of  other  Popes,  and  he  could 
not  hold  the  contrary  in  his  own  case." 

My  chief  authorities  for  the  above  twenty-five  para- 
graphs, anyone  of  which  is  sufficient  to  disprove  the  doc- 
trine of  Papal  Infallibility,  are  Salmon,  Coxe,  Robins, 
Hussey,  Robertson,  Littledale,  Schaff,  Gore,  Glad- 
stone, Puller,  Von  Dollinger,  Hefele,  and  the  unknown 
brilliant  author  of  the  "Pretended  Speech  of  a  Bishop 
in  the  Council."*  If  the  reader  desires  to  pursue  the 
subject  further,  he  will  find  all  that  I  have  said  in  ex- 
panded form  in  the  works  of  these  unexceptionable 
authors,  and  much  more  of  the  same  tenor  which  I  am 
obliged  to  pass  over  for  the  want  of  space. 

♦Before  the  Vatican  Council  there  was  a  large  school  of  "Liberal  Catho- 
lics," composed  chieflv  of  Frenchmen,  Germans  and  Americans,  many  of 
whom  were  scholars  o'f  the  first  rank,  who  expressed  their  opinions  freely 
about  the  grosser  errors  and  corruptions  of  their  Church  and  the  schemes  of 
their  bitter  enemies,  the  Jesuits,  for  the  aggrandizement  of  the  Pope  and  their 
order.  Our  quotations  from  Roman  authorities  are  chiefly  from  the  writing! 
of  representatives  of  this  School. 


t    } 


'f 


1 


V 


1   '1 


n. 


JURISDICTION  OF  THE  POPE, 

INNOCENT  III.,  A.  D.  1198-1216,  wrote  to  the 
Patriarch  of  Constantinople  that  "Christ  has 
committed  the  whole  world  to  the  government  of 
the  Popes."  In  the  famous  Bull,  Unam  Sanctaw,  pro- 
mulgated about  the  year  1300,  by  Pope  Boniface  VIII., 
occurs  this  passage:  *'We  therefore  declare,  assert, 
and  define  that  for  every  human  creature  it  is  alto- 
gether necessary  to  salvation  that  he  be  subject  to  the 
Roman  Pontiff."  The  closing  words  of  the  third  chap- 
ter of  the  dogmatic  decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council,  of 
A.  D.  1870,  are  to  the  sameeffect:  ''If,  then,  any  shall  say 
that  the  Roman  Pontiff  has  the  oflSce  merely  of  inspec- 
tion or  direction,  and  not  full  and  supreme  power  of 
jurisdiction  over  the  universal  Church,  not  only  in 
things  which  belong  to  faith  and  morals,  but  also  in 
those  which  relate  to  the  discipline  and  government  of 
the  Church  spread  thoughout  the  world,  or  assert 
that  he  possiesses  merely  the  principal  part,  and  not  all 
the  fullness  of  this  supreme  power,  or  that  this  power 
which  he  enjoys  is  not  ordinary  and  immediate,  both 
over  each  and  all  the  Churches,  and  over  each  and  all 
the  pastors  and  the  faithful,  let  him  be  anathema." 

As  the  interpretation  which  Protestants  put  upon 
the  above  quotations  is  as  a  rule  warmly  repudiated  by 
American  Roman  Catholics,  it  will  be  well  to  quote  two 
or  three  passages  from  their  own  highest  authorities. 
"No  man  can  deny,"  says  Archbishop  Kenrick,  in  his 

(83) 


I 


84 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


85 


^   ) 


ill 


I: 


undelivered  speech  at  the  Vatican  Council,  "that  the 
purpose  o!  Boniface  in  that  bull  was  to  claim  for  him- 
self temporal  power,  and  to  propound  this  opinion  to 
the  faithful,  to  be  held  under  pain  of  damnation." 
Turrecremata  says  that  "the  power  of  the  keys  com- 
mitted to  the  Pope  reaches  all  places,  persons,  and 
cases,  and  that  in  the  authority  of  his  jurisdiction  he  is 
superior  to  all  the  remainder  of  the  Church ; "  Becan, 
that  "the  Pope  has  the  same  power  of  making  Ecclesias- 
tical laws,  to  bind  the  whole  Church,  as  a  secular  prince 
for  a  kingdom  or  empire ; "  De  Castro,  that  "the  denial 
of  the  Papal  supremacy  has  been  the  great  source  of 
heresies;"  Duval,  that  "the  power  of  Bishops  and 
Patriarchs  in  the  Church  is  derived  from  the  supreme 
monarch,  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  just  as  the  great  offices  in 
France  are  held  of  the  king;"  Bellarmine,  that  "no 
man  can  have  Christ  for  his  Master,  who  is  not  a  sub- 
ject of  the  Pope."  Cardinal  Manning,  speaking  in  the 
Pope's  name,  says:  "I  claim  to  be  the  supreme  judge 
and  director  of  the  consciences  of  men ;  of  the  peasant 
that  tills  the  field,  and  the  prince  that  sits  on  the 
throne ;  of  the  household  that  lives  in  the  shade  of  pri- 
vacy, and  the  legislature  that  makes  laws  for  king- 
doms—I am  the  sole  last  supreme  judge  of  what  is  right 
and  wrong."  The  following  is  from  the  Pope's  official 
organ,  the  Gvinta  Cattolka,  of  March  18,  1871:  "The 
Pope  is  the  supreme  judge  of  the  law  of  the  land.  In 
him,  the  two  powers,  the  spiritual  and  the  secular,  meet 
as  in  their  apex ;  for  he  is  the  Vicegerent  of  Christ,  who 
is  not  only  a  Priest  forever,  but  also  King  of  kings  and 
Lord  of  lords.  The  Pope,  by  virtue  of  his  high  dignity, 
is  at  the  summit  of  both  powers."  Pope  Innocent  III. 
described  himself  as  "the  Vicar  of  Jesus  Christ,  the  suc- 
cessor of  Peter,  the  anointed  of  the  Lord,  the  God  of 
Pharaoh,  short  of  God,  beyond  man,  less  than  God, 


greater  than  man,  who  judges  all  men,  and  is  judged 

by  no  man." 

Of  course,  if  the  Popes  are  really  all  this,  no  man  who 
has  reference  to  the  will  of  God  in  the  choice  of  his 
Church  relationship,  can  either  become  or  remam  a 
member  of  any  branch  of  the  Anglican  Communion,  be- 
cause  the  Chui'ches  of  which  it  is  composed,  not  being  in 
subiection  to  the  Bishop  of  Bome,  form  no  part  of  the 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church.    Episcopalians  contend, 
however,  that  neither  Boniface  VIII.,  nor  any  one  of  his 
predecessors  or  successors,  was  endowed  with  infallibil- 
ity, and  that  the  Episcopal  Church,  by  proofs  drawn 
from  both  Holy  Scripture  and  Ecclesiastical  History,  can 
be  shown  to  be  hot  a  whit  less  Catholic  because  of  her 
independence  of  Papal  government.    Which  of  the  par- 
ties in  this  contention  is  right?  This  is  a  question  which 
we  shall  now  proceed  to  answer.    Though  we  shall  con- 
fine ourselves  as  much  as  possible  to  the  dispute  con- 
cerning the  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope,  it  will  be  clearly  im- 
possible to  lose  sight  altogether  of  the  controversy 
about  his  infallibility.    For  in  showing  that  the  univer- 
sal authority  claimed  by  him  has  no  foundation  in 
Scripture  or  history,  we  necessarily  undermine  his  pre- 
tension to  exemption  from  error. 

Romanists  base  the  Papal  claim  to  universal  do- 
minion upon  the  following  texts :  "Thou  art  Peter,  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,  and  the  gates  of 
hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.  And  I  will  give  unto 
thee  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven:  and  whatso- 
ever thou  Shalt  bind  on  earth  shalt  be  bound  iu  heaven; 
and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth  shall  be 
loosed  in  heaven."  (St.  Matthew,  16:18-19).  "I  have 
prayed  for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and  when  thou 


86 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


87 


art  converted,  strengthen  thy  brethren."    (St.  Luke, 
22:32.)    '-Feed  my  sheep."    (St.  John,  21:17.) 

From  these  texts  it  is  argued  that  St.  Peter  was  con- 
stituted prince  of  the  Apostles  and  Vicar  of  Christ ; "  that 
all  the  power  and  office  that  was  communicable  from  his 
Lord  to  him  who  should  stand  in  His  place  as  the  head 
and  center  of  the  Apostles,  was  communicated  to  Peter, 
and  to  him  was  given  the  undivided  pastoral  care  of  the 
whole  flock  upon  earth."  This  conclusion  reached,  it  is 
further  claimed  that  the  successors  of  St.  Peter  in  the 
See  of  Rome  are  Christ's  sole  representatives  in  the 
world,  and  that  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  a  true 
Church  unless  it  be  presided  over  by  the  Pope  and  in 
communion  with  him. 

Learned  Anglicans  have  repeatedly  shown,  by  Scrip- 
tural and  historical  arguments,  which  the  Romanists 
have  never  been  able  to  answer,  that  the  texts  referred 
to  do  not  give  the  slightest  support  to  these  conclusions, 
and  have  proved  that  the  Church  is  built  on  the  founda- 
tion of  the  Apostles  and  Prophets,  not  of  St.  Peter  alone ; 
JesusChrist  Himself,  not  St.  Peter,  being  thechief  corner- 
stone. There  is  no  intimation  in  the  New  Testament  that 
St.  Peter  based  any  claims  to  authority  upon  Christ's 
words ;  nor  is  there  one  recorded  instance  of  his  exercis- 
ing any  primacy  or  presidency,  or  even  claiming  it.  The 
most  that  can  with  any  show  of  reason  be  inferred  from 
the  texts  under  consideration,  is  a  kind  of  personal 
leadership  among  the  Apostles.  But  granting,  for  the 
Bake  of  argument,  that  he  was  distinguished  by  such 
primacy,  there  is  not  the  slightest  ground  for  the  claim 
that  his  successors  in  the  See  of  Rome  were  to  enjoy  a 
similar  distinction.  The  words  of  Bishop  Barrow  are 
true:  "In  all  Divine  Revelation  the  Bishop  of  Rome  is 
not  so  much  as  once  mentioned,  either  by  name,  or  by 
character,  or  by  probable  intimation." 


The  great  majority  of  the  Fathers  and  Doctors  un- 
derstood the  chief  of  these  texts,  "Thou  art  Peter,  and 
upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my  Church,"  to  refer  to  St. 
Peter's  confession  of  Christ's  Divinity.  The  venerable 
and  learned  Roman  Catholic  Archbishop  of  St.  Louis, 
in  his  famous  discourse  against  the  proposition  to  de- 
clare the  Pope  infallible,  contends  that,  because  the  creed 
of  Pope  Pius  IV.  makes  it  obligatory  upon  them  to  in- 
terpret the  Holy  Scriptures  according  to  the  unanimous 
consent  of  the  Fathers,  Roman  Catholics  cannot  make 
good  their  claim  of  supremacy  for  St.  Peter.  "  If  we 
are  bound,"  says  he,  "to  follow  the  great  number  of  the 
Fathers  in  this  matter,  then  we  must  hold  for  certain 
that  the  word  Peter  means,  not  Peter  professing  the 
Faith,  but  the  Faith  professed  by  Peter.  In  a  remarkable 
pamphlet,  printed  in  the  fac-simile  of  the  manuscript, 
and  presented  to  the  fathers  almost  two  months  ago, 
we  find  five  different  interpretations  of  the  word  'rock,' 
in  the  place  cited. 

"The  first  of  these  declares  that  the  Church  was  built 
on  Peter;  and  this  interpretation  is  followed  by  seven- 
teen fathers,  among  them,  by  Jerome,  and  Cyril  of 
Alexandria.  The  second  interpretation  understands 
from  these  words,  'On  this  rock  will  I  build  my  Church,' 
that  the  Church  was  built  on  all  the  Apostles,  whom 
Peter  represented  by  virtue  of  the  primacy.  And  this 
opinion  is  followed  by  eight  fathers— among  them, 
Origen,  Cyprian,  Theodoret.  The  third  interpretation 
asserts  that  the  words,  '  On  this  rock,'  are  to  be  under- 
stood of  the  faith  which  Peter  had  professed— that  this 
faith,  this  profession  of  faith,  by  which  we  believe  Christ 
to  be  the  Son  of  the  living  God,  is  the  everlasting  and 
immovable  foundation  of  the  Church.  This  interpreta- 
tion is  the  weightiest  of  all,  since  it  is  followed  by 
fifty-four  Fathers  and  Doctors;  among  them,  from  the 


! 


88 


Om  COKTBOVERSY  WITH  ROMANISTS. 


JUEI8DICTI0K    OF  THE   POPE. 


89 


i 


East,  are  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  Chrysostom,  Theophylact ; 
from  the  West,  Hilary,  Ambrose,  Leo  the  Great;  from 
Africa,  Augustine.  The  fourth  interpretation  declares 
that  the  words,  'On  this  rock,'  are  to  be  understood 
of  that  rock  which  Peter  had  confessed,  that  is,  Christ— 
that  the  Church  was  built  upon  Christ.  This  inter- 
pretation is  followed  by  sixteen  Fathers  and  Doctors. 
The  fifth  interpretation  of  the  Fathers  understands 
by  the  name  of  the  rock,  the  faithful  themselves, 
who,  believing  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  are 
constituted  living  stones  out  of  which  the  Church  is 

built." 

"I  suppose,"  says  Professor  Salmon,  "there  is  no 
text  on  which  the  Fathers  have  given  greater  variety  of 
interpretation  than  '  Thou  ai-t  Peter ; '  and  we  have  to 
go  down  far  indeed  before  we  find  one  who  discovered 
the  Bishop  of  Rome  in  it." 

In  their  Collect  for  the  Yigil  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul, 
Romanists  are  taught  to  pray:  '*  Grant,  we  beseech  Thee, 
Almighty  God,  that  thou  wouldst  not  suffer  us,  whom 
Thou  hast  established  on  the  Rock  of  the  Apostolic 
Confession,  to  be  shaken  by  any  disturbances." 

The  remaining  part  of  the  text  contains,  indeed,  a 
notable  promise,  and,  if  it  were  all  that  our  Lord  had 
said  upon  the  subject,  the  supremacy  of  St.  Peter  over 
the  rest  of  the  Apostles  could  hardly  be  questioned.  "  I 
will  give  unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven ; 
and  whatsoever  thoushalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound 
in  heaven ;  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  heaven." 

But  what  was  here  promised  before  the  Cruci- 
fixion to  one  Apostle,  was,  after  the  Resurrection,  actu- 
ally bestowed  upon  each  of  them,  without  distinction,  as 
a  part  of  their  common  commission.  "  Then  said  Jesus 
unto  them  again,  Peace  be  unto  you:   as  my  Father 


hath  sent  me,  even  so  send  I  you.  And  when  He  had 
said  this  He  breathed  on  them,  and  saith  unto  them, 
Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost :  Whosesoever  sins  ye  re- 
mit, they  are  remitted  unto  them,  and  whosesoever  sins 
ye  retain,  they  are  retained."  By  interpreting  these 
texts  in  the  light  of  each  other,  it  is  clear  that 
the  promise  was  made  to  St.  Peter  as  the  representa- 
tive of  his  fellow  Apostles.  This  was  the  view  of  the 
great  St.  Augustine,  Bishop  of  Hippo,  a.  d.  391-430. 
He  says:  ** Peter,  in  many  places  of  the  Scriptures,  ap- 
pears as  representing  the  Church,  but  especially  where 
it  is  said  of  him,  '  I  will  give  you  the  keys.'  Has  Peter 
received  these  keys,  and  has  not  Paul  received  them? 
Has  Peter  received  them,  and  not  James  and  John,  and 
the  rest  of  the  A  postles  ? " 

The  context  shows  how  St.  Peter  came  to  be  repre- 
sentatively addressed.  It  was  not  because  he  was  to 
be  the  first  Bishop  of  Rome,  St.  Paul,  or  more  proba- 
bly Linus,  was  this,  but  because  he  was  the  first  to 
give  expression  to  the  growing  conviction  among  the 
twelve  that  Jesus  was  none  other  than  the  promised 
Messiah,  the  Divine  Saviour  of  the  world.  As  he  was 
the  spokesman  for  the  rest  in  this  glorious  confession,  it 
was  natural  that  they  should  through  him  receive  the 
promise  of  stewardship— that  is  what  the  keys  signify 
—in  the  Church  or  Kingdom  which  Christ  would  found 
on  the  rock  of  faith  in  His  Divinity.  '*  I  do  not  think," 
says  Canon  Gore,  "  we  can  make  it  too  plain  how  exclu- 
sively Western  in  growth  is  the  Papal  claim,  as  Rome 
understands  it.  Thus  it  does  not  appear  that  a  single 
Greek  Father  of  the  first  six  centuries  recognizes  the 
connection,  which  Rome  supposes  to  exist,  between  the 
promise  to  St.  Peter  and  the  position  of  the  Pope.  *  In 
the  writings  of  the  Greek  Doctors,'  says  Manus,'  *Euse- 
bius,  St.  Athanasius,  St.  Basil  the  Great,  the  two  Greg- 


P 


90 


mjM   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


91 


I 


i 


ories,  and  St.  Epiphanius,  there  is  not  one  word  of  any 
prerogatives  of  the  Roman  Bishop.  The  most  copious 
of  the  Greek  Fathers,  St.  Chrysostom,  is  wholly  silent 
on  the  subject.'  Universal  negatives  are  somewhat  dan- 
gerous, but  I  do  not  think  that  this  can  be  disputed." 

But  owing  to  the  fact  that  the  promise  was  made 
through  St.  Peter,  and  because  we  see  in  the  Acts  of  the 
Apostles  that  he  was  the  first  to  exercise  the  power  of 
the  keys  by  opening  the  door  of  the  Church  to  both  the 
Jewish  and  Gentile  world,  Anglican  scholars,  follow- 
ing the  early  Christian  writers,  very  generally  grant 
that  Christ  may  have  intended  to  reward  him  for  his 
courageous  avowal,  by  making  him  the  first  among  his 
equals,  that  is  to  say,  the  chairman  or  official  head  of 
his  brethren.  There  is  no  serious  dispute  between  Ro- 
manists and  Anglicans  on  this  point.  We  part  company, 
however,  when  they  pretend,  upon  the  ground  of  the 
primacy,  which  we  are  willing  to  admit,  that  St.  Peter 
was  the  Vicar  of  the  ascended  Master  to  the  Apostolic 
Church,  and  that,  therefore,  his  successors  in  the  See  of 
Home  are  Divinely  commissioned  to  lord  it  over  the  rest 
of  Christendom. 

Moreover,  it  has  been  settled  almost  conclusively 
that  the  Roman  Succession  is  due  quite  as  much  to  St. 
Paul  as  to  St.  Peter  and  that  the  Church  of  Rome  does 
not  owe  her  origin,  except  perhaps  indirectly ,  to  the  latter 
of  these  Apostles,  and  that  he  was  not  the  first  resident 
Bishop  of  "the  Eternal  City."  Such  authors  as  Professor 
Salmon  on  the  one  side  and  Dr.  Dollinger  on  the  other 
substantially  agree  in  this  conclusion.  The  former  of 
these  great  authorities  in  his  chapter  on  "  Peter's  Alleged 
Roman  Episcopate,"  says:  ''lam  justified  in  thinking 
that  candid  inquirers  need  not  differ  very  much  on  these 
questions,  because  I  find  that  the  results  at  which  I 
had  arrived  independently  are,  on  several  points,  in 
agreement  with  those  obtained  by  von   Dollinger  in 


his  First  Age  of  the  Church,  a  book  pub!ished  while 
he  was  still  in  full  communion  with  the  Church  of 
Rome,  and  was  regarded  as  its  ablest  champion." 
Scaliger,  the  greatest  scholar  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
says  that  '*no  moderately  learned  man  can  believe 
Peter's  Journey  to  Rome,  his  session  for  twenty-five 
years,  or  his  capital  punishment  there."  Ranke  says 
cautiously  and  truly:  '^Historical  criticism  has  shown 
that  it  is  a  matter  of  doubt  w^hether  the  Apostle  ever  was 
at  Rome  at  all."  But  however  this  may  be,  Wycliflfe  ex- 
pressed the  whole  truth  of  the  matter  in  a  few  words 
when  he  said :  "As  it  does  not  folio w%  because  Peter  was 
personally  called  *  Satan '  by  our  Lord,  that,  therefore, 
he  was  made  lower  than  any  of  the  Apostles,  so  it  does 
not  follow,  because  certain  privileges  were  given  him 
personally  in  the  words :  '  Thou  art  Peter,'  that,  there- 
fore, he  was  made  Pope  and  head  of  the  Church  after  our 
Lord's  ascension." 

According  to  the  understanding  of  the  Fathers,  the 
second  text  relied  upon  by  Romanists,  "I  have  prayed 
for  thee  that  thy  faith  fail  not,  and  when  thou  art  con- 
verted strengthen  thy  brethren,"  was  intended  to  warn 
St.  Peter  of  his  pitiable  weakness  which  manifested 
itself  in  the  base  denials  of  his  Lord  recorded  in  the 
same  chapter,  and  to  prevent  him  from  falling  aw^ay 
altogether.  It  is  claimed  by  Roman  divines  that  this 
prayer  and  precept  of  our  Lord  extends  to  all  the 
Bishops  of  Rome,  as  St.  Peter's  successors,  and  that  in 
speaking  to  St.  Peter  our  Lord  spoke  to  them.  "  Would 
they,"  asks  Dr.  Wordsworth,  late  Bishop  of  Lincoln, 
"be  willing  to  complete  the  parallel  and  say  that  the 
Bishops  of  Rome  especially  need  prayer  because  they 
deny  Christ  ?  Let  them  not  take  a  part  of  it  and  deny 
the  rest." 


92 


OUR    COHTBOVEBSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


The  third  text,  "Feed  my  sheep,"  was  regarded  as 
Christ 's  gracious  absolution  of  Peter  upon  his  sorrow- 
ful repentance,  and  the  restoration  of  him  to  the  Apos- 
tolic office  which  had  been  forfeited.  True,  our  Lord,  in 
commanding  St.  Peter  to  feed  his  sheep,  uses,  as  Eoman 
Catholic  controversialists  point  out,  a  word  which  con- 
veys the  idea  of  ruling  as  well  as  feeding.  But  if  they 
argue  from  this  that  to  St.  Peter  alone  was  given  the 
fullness  of  authority  to  feed  the  lambs  and  the  sheep— 
the  whole  flock  of  Christ— how  will  they  explain  St. 
Paul's  injunction  to  the  elders  of  Ephesus,  "Feed  the 
Church  of  God?"  It  is  the  same  Greek  word.  Mani- 
festly the  Roman  argument,  if  consistently  adhered  to, 
would  prove  that  the  Ephesian  elders  and  their  succes- 
sors were,  by  the  use  of  this  word,  all  created  universal 
Popes.  "  Indeed,  St.  Paul  expressly  tells  them  that  the 
Holy  Ghost  has  made  them  overseers  to  all'the  flock, 
which  is  more  than  the  Lord  said  to  St.  Peter  himself." 
St.  Peter  received  no  more  power  from  Christ  than  the 
other  Apostles,  for  nothing  was  said  to  him  which  was 
not  also  said  to  them.  All  the  Apostles  were  therefore 
equal  to  St.  Peter  in  power. 


An  exhaustive  consideration  of  all  the  passages  of 
Scripture  which  are  irreconcilable  with  the  Papal  pre- 
tensions would  be  w  earisome.  It  is  therefore  fortunate 
that  the  texts,  as  a  rule,  are  so  clear  and  conclusive 
that  only  a  few  need  to  be  cited  or  alluded  to,  with  but 
little  comment.  Upon  two  or  three  occasions  our  Lord 
refused  to  grant  the  request  of  His  disciples  to  indicate 
which  of  them  was  to  be  chief.  The  last  was  on  the 
night  before  His  Crucifixion.  His  refusals  will  at  once 
be  seen  to  be  unaccountable  upon  the  Roman  hypothe- 
sis.   For,  surely,  if  that  were  correct,  the  supremacy  of 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE   POPE. 


93 


St.  Peter   would  have   been   clearly  proclaimed   and 

recognized. 

Again,  the  claim  of  Ultramontanists  cannot  be 
reconciled  with  the  fact  that  St.  Paul  received  neither 
his  commission  as  an  Apostle  nor  his  doctrine  from  St. 
Peter  individually,  or  from  the  college  of  Apostles,  and 
that  yet  they  gave  him  the  right  hand  of  fellowship  and 
intrusted  him  with  the  leadership  in  the  evangelization 
of  the  Gentiles.  As  he  himself  tells  us,  he  labored  more 
abundantly  than  any  of  his  colleagues,  and  this  he 
did  quite  independently  of  St.  Peter.  '^This  fact,"  says 
one,  "seems  to  have  been  Divinely  intended  to  bar, 
from  the  very  first,  the  Papal  claim  as  false  and  unten- 
able." 

When  St.  Peter  dissembled  with  the  Jews,  St.  Paul 
not  only  rebuked  him,  but  rebuked  him  publicly,  show- 
ing that  if  St.  Paul  was  not  his  superior,  he  was  at  least 

his  equal. 

When  Samaria  had  received  the  Gospel  from  Philip, 
the  Deacon,  and  converts  needed  Confirmation,  and  the 
subject  came  before  the  Apostles,  did  St.  Peter  direct 
who  should  perform  the  duty?  On  the  contrary,  the 
Apostles  sent  him,  together  with  St.  John ;  and  Christ 
says,  "A  servant  is  not  greater  than  his  lord;  nor  he 
that  is  sent  greater  than  he  that  sent  him." 

St.  Paul  speaks  of:  "That  which  comes  upon  me 
daily,  the  care  of  all  the  Churches."  How  fortunate 
it  would  have  been  for  the  Roman  claims  if  St.  Peter 
had  said  this  of  himself. 

"The  same  Apostle  Paul,"  says  a  Roman  Catholic 
writer,  "enumerating  the  offices  of  the  Church,  mentions 
Apostles,  Prophets,  Evangelists,  pastors  and  teachers. 
Is  it  credible  that  St.  Paul,  the  great  teacher  of  the 
Gentiles,  would  have  left  out  the  greatest  of  all  the 
offices,  the  Papacy,  if  the  Papacy  had  been  founded  by 


' 


M 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF    THE  POPE. 


95 


I 


Divine  institution?  It  seems  to  me  that  this  omission 
would  have  been  no  more  possible  than  a  history  of  the 
Vatican  Council  that  should  make  no  mpBtion  of  His 
Holiness,  Pius  IX." 

*'But,"  says  the  same  author,  "the  thing  which 
astounds  me  beyond  all  expression  is  the  silence  of  St. 
Peter  himself.  If  he  had  been  what  we  say— the  Vicar  of 
Christ  upon  earth— he  must  have  known  it.  If  he  knew 
it,  how  does  it  happen  that  he  never  once,  not  one  sol- 
itary time,  acted  as  Pope?  He  might  have  done  it  on 
the  Day  of  Pentecost-,  when  he  pronounced  his  first  dis- 
course ;  but  he  did  not.  He  might  have  done  it  at  An- 
tioch ;  but  he  did  not.  He  might  have  done  it  at  the 
Council  of  Jerusalem ;  but  he  did  not.  He  might  have 
done  it  in  his  two  epistles  to  the  Churches;  but  he  did 
not.    Can  you  imagine  such  a  Pope  as  this  ?  " 

Of  St.  Paul  it  is  said  that  to  him  the  uncircum- 
cision  were  committed ;  that  is,  all  but  Jews  were  put 
under  his  headship.  Hence,  it  is  clear  that  if  we  Gen- 
tiles have  a  spiritual  monarch,  he  is  St.  Paul,  not  St. 
Peter. 

The  claims  of  Rome  respecting  St.  Peter's  superiority 
will  appear  in  their  right  light  if,  as  Dr.  Littledale  sug- 
gests, we  ask  these  questions :  Suppose  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles  decided  one  way  and  St.  Peter  separately  de- 
cided the  other  way,  which  decision  would  stand? 
When  St.  Paul  withstood  St.  Peter  to  the  face,  which  of 
the  two  actually  yielded  ?    See  Galatians  II :  11-14. 

The  silence  of  our  Lord  is  hard  to  explain  on  the 
Roman  hypothesis.  As  a  candid  author  of  the  Roman 
Communion  observes:  "Not  only  is  Christ  silent  upon 
this  point,  but  He  has  so  little  thought  of  giving  the 
Church  a  chief,  that  when  He  is  promising  thrones  to 
His  Apostles,  to  judge  the  twelve  tribes  of  Israel,  He 
promises  twelve  of  them,  without  saying  that  one  is 


to  be  higher  than  the  rest,  and  is  to  belong  to  Peter. 
Surely,  if  he  had  wished  Peter  to  occupy  a  throne  that 
should  overshadow  the  rest.  He  would  have  said  so. 
What  must  we  infer  from  this  silence?  Logic  tells  us: 
Christ  did  not  intend  to  make  Peter  the  chief  of  the 
Apostolic  college.'* 

The  following  golden  words  of  a  Franciscan  monk 
show  how  utterly  out  of  accord  the  Papal  claim  to  sov- 
ereignty is,  with  not  only  the  letter  but  the  spirit  of  the 
New  Testament:  "If  the  Bishop  of  Rome  possessed  a 
plenitude  of  power,  such  as  the  Popes  falsely  lay  claim 
to,  and  such  as  many,  through  mistake,  or  in  the  spirit 
of  adulation,  concede  to  them,  all  men  would  be  slaves; 
and  this  is  plainly  contrary  to  the  liberty  of  the  Gospel 
law." 


The  hollowness  of  the  Papal  pretensions  to  supreme 
authority  appears  also  from  the  history  of  the  early 
Ecclesiastical  Councils.  If  the  Bishops  of  Rome  were 
really  by  Divine  appointment  and  inspiration  the  uni- 
versal sovereigns  and  unerring  guides  of  Christendom, 
it  is  impossible  to  explain  the  obscure  and  subordinate 
position  which  some  of  them  occupied  in  these  delibera- 
tive assemblies  and  the  condemnation  which  was 
passed  upon  others.  Indeed,  upon  the  Ultramontane 
hypothesis,  it  is  difficult  to  account  for  the  great  Coun- 
cils at  all.  If  the  infallibility  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  had 
been  recognized  during  the  Conciliary  period  which  em- 
braces the  five  hundred  years  from  the  fourth  to  the 
ninth  centuries,  there  would  have  been  no  need  of  the 
expense  and  trouble  of  bringing  a  host  of  fallible 
Bishops  from  distant  parts  to  pass  upon  matters  that 
might  have  been  disposed  of  by  a  stroke  of  the  Pope's 
pen.     Under  such  circumstances,  the  only  imaginable 


96 


iiuil  UnitTROVERSY  i^rrm  homanists. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


97 


reasons  for  a  Connci!  would  have  been  to  give  an 
opportunity  of  explaining  to  the  heads  of  Dioceses, 
Provinces,  and  Patriarchates  the  decrees  upon  which 
"His  Holiness"  had  resolved,  and  to  add  dignity  and 
solemnity  to  the  occasion  of  their  promulgation.  But 
if  these  had  been  the  ends  in  view,  the  Popes  would  have 
called  each  of  the  Councils  which  are  recognized  by  the 
Greek  and  Latin  Churches  as  Ecumenical,  and  their 
resolutions  or  decrees,  passed  not  infrequently  after 
many  months  of  debate,  would  have  served  no  purpose 
but  to  provide  the  delegates  with  an  exciting  pastime. 
At  best  their  action  could  have  had  no  other  effect 
than  that  of  a  recommendation  to  the  Pope,  whose  ap- 
proval and  signature  Avould  have  been  required  to 
make  it  a  law.  But  it  has  been  admitted  by  the 
greatest  Roman  scholars  that  *'the  Popes  took  no 
part  in  convoking  Councils.  All  Great  Councils,  to 
which  Bishops  came  from  different  countries,  were  con- 
voked by  the  emperors."  The  same  authorities  also 
admit  that  "neither  the  dogmatic  nor  the  disciplinary 
decisions  of  these  Councils  required  Papal  confirma- 
tion." 

Even  St.  Peter  himself,  as  we  have  seen,  did  not  pre- 
side  at  the  Council  of  the  Church  held  at  Jerusalem  to 
settle  the  dispute  which  had  arisen  between  the  Jewish 
and  Gentile  converts.  Nor  were  the  so-called  successors 
of  St.  Peter  in  the  See  of  Rome  the  conveners,  or  ex 
ofScio  presidents,  of  any  of  the  General  Councils.  These 
were  all  called  by  the  reigning  emperor.  They  were  pre- 
dominantly, and  some  of  them  exclusively.  Oriental. 
From  the  year  325,  in  which  the  first  Council  of  Nicae 
was  held,  to  the  year  680,  the  date  of  the  third  Council 
of  Constantinople,  out  of  the  one  thousand  one  hun- 
dred and  nine  Bishops  who  attended  the  six  great  Coun- 
cils, only  nineteen  were  from  Western  Europe.    They 


were  "presided  over,''  says  Dr.  Kurtz,  "either  by  the 
monarch  in  person,  or  by  a  prelate  chosen  by  the 
Council." 

Hosius,  Bishop  of  Cordova,  a  province  of  Spain,  was 
elected  president  of  the  first  Nicene  Council.  The  third 
Council,  A.  D.  481,  which  met  at  Ephesus,  was  presided 
over  by  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria.  It  was  convened  to 
consider  a  matter  which  had  already  been  passed  upon 
by  the  Pope,  in  a  Roman  Synod,  whose  judgment  was 
not  regarded  as  conclusive.  The  Pope's  legates,  to- 
gether with  the  Patriarch  of  Constantinople,  presided 
at  the  fourth  Council,  a.  d.  451,  which  also  acted  upon 
matters  that  had  already  been  considered  by  the  Ro- 
man Bishop  and  Synod.  The  fifth  Council,  a.  d.  553, 
contradicted  with  anathemas  a  doctrinal  statement  of 
Pope  Vigilius,  and  compelled  him  to  retract  it,  as  well 
as  to  conform  to  its  own  contrary  decision.  The  sixth 
Council,  a.  d.  680,  as  we  have  observed  elsewhere,  form- 
ally anathematized  Pope  Honorius  I.  as  a  heretic— a 
condemnation  which  was  submitted  to  by  the  Roman 
Church,  and  for  nearly  a  thousand  years  afterward  was 
renewed  by  every  one  of  her  Popes  at  his  coronation. 
In  view  of  the  simple  truth  in  regard  to  the  Popes  and 
the  Councils  which  may  be  read  in  the  Church  histories 
of  reliable  Roman,  as  well  as  Protestant,  authors, 
what  becomes  of  the  Papal  claims? 

In  addition  to  the  abundant  evidence  which  has  al- 
ready been  given  in  support  of  the  Anglican  and  Greek 
contention,  that  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  during  the  first 
centuries,  did  not  claim  or  exercise  jurisdiction  outside 
of  their  own  Diocese,  may  be  mentioned  the  correspond- 
ence which  they  had  with  their  brethren  of  the  Episco- 
pate. If  by  Divine  appointment  they  stood  in  the  same 
relation  to  the  rest  of  the  Bishops  as  our  Lord  did  to 
the  Apostles,  the  early  Church  Fathers  knew  it,  and  their 

C.  A.-7 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    tOPE. 


99 


knowledge  of  this  vitally  important  fact  would  be  man- 
ifest in  their  communications  with  them,  and  they 
themselves  would  be  evidently  mindful  of  their  unique 
position  while  inditing  letters.  But  there  is  nothing  in 
the  epistolary  remains  of  the  first  three  or  four  hundred 
years  to  indicate  that  it  ever  occurred  to  any  of  the 
Popes,  or  to  their  contemporary  Bishops,  that  they 
were  not,  in  respect  to  their  commission,  on  the  same 
footing.  They  addressed  each  other  just  as  the  Bish- 
ops of  the  United  States  and  our  Primate  do.  On  the 
one  hand  there  was  no  assumption  of  superiority,  and 
on  the  other  no  acknowledgment  of  inferiority,  even  by 
the  occupants  of  the  most  out-of-the-way  and  obscure 
Dioceses. 

For  example,  St.  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage  from 
A.  D.  248-57,  corresponds  with  the  various  Popes  with 
whom  he  was  contemporary,  on  terms  of  complete  equal- 
ity. He  speaks  of  them,  and  addresses  them,  as  his 
brothers  and  his  colleagues.  "  What  is  more  notorious 
than  that  those,  and  those  only,  could  be  colleagues  who 
enjoyed  the  same  power  and  the  same  prerogatives?" 
Councils  used  the  same  form  of  address.  The  Fathers  of 
Constantinople  inscribed  their  epistle  to  their  *'  brethren 
and  colleagues,  Damasus  of  Rome,  Ambrose  of  Milan,  and 
others."  The  Council  of  Antioch  addressed  a  synodical 
letter,  about  Paul  of  Samosata,  to  *'  Dionysius,  Bishop 
of  Rome,  and  Maximus,  Bishop  of  Alexandria,  and  to 
all  their  fellow-servants,  Bishops,  Presbyters,  Deacons, 
and  to  the  whole  Church."  Another  Council  at  Constan- 
tinople wrote  to  '^Damasus,  Britto,  Valerian,"  and 
others,  uniting  their  names  without  any  mark  of  dis- 
tinction, but  calling  them  alike  brothers  and  fellow-ser- 
vants. "It  must  not  be  supposed,''  observes  Father 
Puller,  "that  this  familiar  style  of  address  was  due  to 
the  primitive  simplicity  of  the  Christians  of  that  age. 


On  the  contrary,  when  the  Priests  and  Deacons  of  Rome 
have  occasion  to  write  to  St.  Cyprian,  they  conclude 
their  letter  thus :  '  Most  blessed  and  most  glorious  Pope, 
we  bid  vou  ever  hear  til  v  farewell  in  the  Lord.'  And 
again,  when  the  same  Priests  and  Deacons  of  Rome, 
writing  to  the  Clergy  of  Carthage,  have  occasion  to 
refer  to  St.  Cyprian,  they  say:  'We  have  learnt  that 
the  blessed  Pope  Cyprian  has,  for  a  certain  reason, 
retired.' " 

The  equality  of  the  Pope  and  other  Bishops  is  even 
more  apparent  from  the  disputes  which  he  had  with 
some  of  them  than  from  his  friendly  correspondence. 
Firmilian,  Bishop  of  Cappadocia,  applied  language  of 
unusual  harshness  to  Stephen,  Bishop  of  Rome.  He 
compares  him  to  Judas;  accuses  him  of  "  defaming  the 
Apostles;"  calls  him  "Wind,"  "ignorant,"  "rash," 
"  presumptuous,"  "a  partaker  with  heretics,"— Stephen 
had  called  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  whose  part 
Firmilian  was  taking, "  antichrist,"  "  false  apostle"  and 
"deceitful  worker."  "Nothing,  indeed,  could  well  be 
more  grievous  than  the  spirit  in  which  the  conflict  was 
carried  on.  Christian  meekness  and  charitv  were  sacri- 
ficed  by  both  parties;  there  was  certainly  no  restraint 
in  the  use  of  reproachful  terms  through  any  conscious 
inferiority  to  the  Roman  Bishop.  Cyprian  maintained 
his  conclusion  as  strongly  against  Stephen  as  he  would 
against  any  other  .Bishop ;  he  rebuked  him  as  freely, 
and  condemned  him  as  severely.  The  anger  of  Stephen, 
on  the  other  hand,  is  a  proof  of  how  he  understood  thel 
conduct  of  his  opponent;  yet  he  does  not  venture  to 
charge  him  with  rebellion  against  the  See,  which  is  now 
said  to  be  the  center  and  source  of  unity.  Harsh  words 
he  gave  abundantly  in  reply,  but  he  stopped  short  of 
the  point  which  is  indispensable  to  the  papal  argument." 
An   appeal  to  local  synods  or  General  Councils  some- 


100 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


times  showed  that  the  Pope  was  right,  and  then  he  had 
the  satisfaction  of  a  victory ;  but,  unfortunately  for  the 
Papal  claims,  quite  as  frequently  he  was  convicted  of 
error,  and  so  had  to  bear  the  chagrin  of  defeat,  and 
even  of  rebuke  and  condemnation. 

It  should  be  remarked  in  this  connection  that  there 
were  times,  before  the  rise  of  the  Papacy,  when  the  Sees 
of  Carthage,  Alexandria,  Constantinople  and  Milan  in 
turn  temporarily  quite  overshadowed  the  See  of  Koine. 
This  was  sometimes  owing  to  political  circumstances, 
but  more  frequently  to  the  great  superiority  of  the 
Bishop  or  Patriarch  over  the  Pope.  Gregory  Nazianzen, 
himself  one  of  the  Primates  of  Christendom  as  Bishop  of 
Constantinople,  said  truly  of  his  brother  Patriarch, 
"  The  head  of  the  Alexandrian  Church  is  the  head  of  the 
world."  At  a  later  period,  Justinian's  rescript  also 
recognizes  Constantinople  as  the  head  of  all  the 
Churches.  At  another  time  it  was  correctly  said  of  the 
gi'eat  Cyprian,  Bishop  of  Carthage,  that  he  ^'presided 
not  only  over  the  Church  of  Carthage  and  over  Africa, 
but  also  over  all  the  countries  of  the  West,  and  over 
nearly  all  the  regions  of  the  East  and  of  the  South 
and  of  the  North."  It  is  scarcely  necessary  to  add 
that  the  presidency  which  St.  Cyprian  exercised  was 
not,  outside  of  Africa,  a  headship  of  jurisdiction,  but 
one  of  love  and   honor,    and,    as   a   consequence,  of 

influence. 

But  though  the  Pope  of  Kome  has  not,  by  Divine  ap- 
pointment, any  jurisdiction  over  other  Bishops  and  their 
Dioceses,  yet  at  an  early  date  the  Church  of  both  the 
East  and  the  West  conceded  the  primacy  to  him,  and  in 
the  course  of  time  he  began  to  exercise  a  more  or  less 
universal  and  absolute  supremacy  over  Western  Chris- 
tendom. An  explanation  of  how  this  came  about  will  be 
necessary  to  show  that  the  Catholicity  of  the  Anglican 


JURISDICTION   OF   THE   POPE. 


101 


Communion  is  not  in  the  least  compromised  by  its  pres- 
ent independent  position. 


The  universal  primacy  with  which  the  Pope  was  hon- 
ored during  several  centuries,  is  accounted  for  by  the 
development  of  the  Patriarchal  system.  The  Apostles 
were  equal  in  authority,  because  they  all  received  the 
same  commission.  As  the  authorized  representatives  of 
Christ  they  gave  this  commission  and  the  authority  con- 
nected with  it  to  their  successors,  whom  we  call  Bishops. 
When  the  xVpostles  and  Bishops  met  for  consultation 
and  corporate  official  action,  as  they  did  more  or  less 
frequently  from  the  beginning,  it  was  necessary  that 
one  of  them  should  be  the  chairman.  Before  the  crea- 
tion of  Diocesan  Bishops,  this  privilege,  by  common 
consent,  mav  have  been  accorded  to  St.  Peter.  When- 
ever  a  number  of  men  associate  themselves  together 
for  any  purpose,  some  one  of  them  comes  to  the  front 
as  a  leader.  In  this  instance,  it  would  appear  from 
the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and  from  tradition,  that  St. 
Peter  was  the  person  who  did  so.  It  is  probable  that 
he  was  the  oldest  of  the  twelve.  If  so,  this  of  itself, 
other  things  being  equal,  would  single  him  out  for 
honor.  But  it  would  seem  that  not  only  was  he  the 
senior,  but  that  he  was  also  by  nature  endowed  above 
his  fellows  w  ith  the  qualities  of  leadership.  In  order  to 
account  for  the  part  which  he  took  after  the  Ascension, 
until  St.  Paul  becomes  the  central  figure,  there  is  no  need 
of  the  Ultramontane  hypothesis  that  he  was  designated 
by  the  Lord  as  Prince  of  the  Apostles.  Even  if  Koman- 
ists  could  substantiate  this  view,  which  is  an  impossi- 
bility, before  it  would  be  of  service  to  them  in  their 
controversy  with  the  great  Greek  and  Anglican  Com- 
munions, it  would  be  necessary  for  them  to  show  con- 


102 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF    THE    POPE. 


103 


clusively  that  the  prerogatives  of  St.  Peter  had  been 
duly  made  over  to  the  Bishops  of  Rome  in  succession. 
There  is  not  a  scrap  of  evidence  that  they  ever  inherited 
anything  from  him,  not  even  the  primacy  of  natural 
leadership,  which  he  appears  to  have  enjoyed  for  a  season , 
certainly  not  the  supremacy  which  he  never  possessed. 

We  have  conceded  that,  owing  to  his  age  and  nat- 
ural qualifications,  St.  Peter  may  have  presided  at 
most  of  the  formal  meetings  of  the  Apostolic  college. 
But  as  the  Diocesan  system  developed,  the  Bishop  of 
the  city  in  which  a  Council  was  held,  would  take 
the  chair  without  encroaching  upon  any  known  right 
of  St.  Peter.  This  was  illustrated  in  Jerusalem^  the 
first  See  City,  by  St.  James,  the  first  Diocesan.  After 
his  Consecration  to  be  Bishop  of  the  Mother  Church, 
the  Apostles  had  occasion  to  meet  at  their  headquar- 
ters. As  this  is  the  only  Council  of  which  we  have 
any  New  Testament  record,  we  conclude  that  it  must 
have  been  of  exceptional  importance.  In  view  of  the 
claims  which  Romanists  make  for  St.  Peter, the  fact  that 
not  he,  but  St.  James,  was  president,  is  inexplicable. 

In  the  course  of  time,  when  the  whole  Roman  Empire 
was  divided  into  Dioceses,  the  Bishops  of  each  Province 
were  accustomed  to  meet  for  consultation  and  legisla- 
tion. The  Bishop  of  the  Diocese  in  which  the  Provincial 
Council  met  presided,  or  at  least  his  right  to  the  presi- 
dency was  for  a  long  time  recognized.  But  the  transac- 
tion of  business  in  the  interim  between  the  Councils  re- 
quired an  official  head,  and  this  was  usually  the  Bishop 
of  the  chief  city  or  of  an  Apostolic  See.  Out  of  this  neces- 
sity it  was  that  the  Metropolitan  system  grew.  Ulti- 
mately the  Metropolitans  were  called  Archbishops,  and 
were  generally,  by  courtesy,  conceded  the  right  to  pre- 
side at  all  Provincial  Councils,  whether  held  in  or  out  of 
t^eir  own  Dioceses.    When  it  wets  necessary  to  decide 


some  question  of  more  general  importance,  the  Arch- 
bishops and  Bishops  of  two  or  more  Provinces  would 
come  together  for  the  purpose.  At  first  the  Archbishop 
of  the  Pro\ince  in  which  the  meeting  was  held  presided. 
But  after  a  time  the  confederation  developed  into  the 
Patriarchal  system,  and  its  oflScial  head  for  the  interim 
between  Councils,  who  usually  occupied  the  most  impor- 
tant See  of  the  whole  confederation,  was  designated  Pa- 
triarch, and  conceded  the  right  of  presidency  over  these 
assemblies,  whether  held  in  his  own  or  in  another  Arch- 
episcopal  Province. 

The  whole  of  Christendom  was  divided  into  five 
Patriarchates,  namely,  Rome,  Constantinople,  Anti- 
och,  Alexandria  and  Jerusalem.  Now  and  then  it  was 
found  necessary,  for  the  preservation  of  the  faith  and 
the  unity  of  the  Church,  to  hold  a  Council  in  which 
all  the  Patriarchates  should  be  as  fully  represented  as 
possible.  These  General  Councils  created  the  need  of 
of  an  official  head  for  the  whole  Christian  world.  This 
high  distinction  would,  of  course,  fall  to  one  of  the 
five  Patriarchs,  and  naturally  to  him  who  occupied 
the  most  powerful  See,  namely,  the  Pope  of  Rome. 

Ever}'  Bishop  was  originally  called  Pope,  but  as  time 
went  on  the  title  was  more  and  more  restricted  to  the 
Patriarchs.  Then,  owing  to  various  circumstances,  the 
occupant  of  the  Roman  See  had  the  distinction  of  being 
called  ''  the  Pope."  In  later  times  the  title  was  appro- 
priated almost  exclusively  to  the  Bishops  of  Rome, 
while  those  of  the  other  Patriarchal  Sees  were  called 
Patriarchs.  Each  title  is  derived  from  a  Greek  word 
meaning  "father."  Patriarch  is  the  more  dignified  of 
the  two,  since  it  is  applicable  not  so  much  to  the  head 
pf  a  family  as  to  the  chief  or  ruler  of  a  clan. 

It  is  worthy  of  note  that  England,  probably  by 
reason  of  its  isolation  and  early  political  obsciirity,  was 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 

not  canonically  made  a  part  of  the  Koman.  or  of  any 
other,  Patriarchate.  Says  an  able  writer  on  *' English 
Orders:"  " Our  contention  is  that  Britain  or  any  part 
thereof,  as  England,  was  never  within  any  Patriarchate 
at  anytime,  and  was  never  assigned  by  any  Ecumenical 
Council  to  any  Patriarchate.  It  was  and  is  outside  of  all 
Patriarchates  and  therefore  was  and  is  independent." 
The  exceptional  position  of  the  Church  of  England  was 
recognized  by  a  Pope,  in  his  treatment  of  one  of  the  Arch- 
bishops of  Canterbury  who,  happening  to  be  in  Italy 
during  the  meeting  of  a  Provincial  Synod,  made  an 
effort  to  attend  its  sessions  incognito.  He  did  not, 
however,  escape  recognition.  The  Pope,  having  been 
made  aware  of  his  presence,  introduced  him  as  ''the 
Pope  of  another  World"  and  insisted  on  his  being 
seated  with  him  upon  the  Papal  throne. 

It  was  not  then  because  of  any  prerogative  inherited 
from  St.  Peter,  but  because  their  See  City  was  the  world's 
metropolis  and  seat  of  government,  that  the  Bishops  of 
Rome,  with  the  development  of  the  Patriarchal  system, 
came  to  be  recognized  as  the  first  among  equals. 


That  the  presidency  enjoyed  by  the  Roman  Prelates 
was  of  human  rather  than  Divine  institution,  is  also 
evident  from  the  legislation  upon  the  subject  by  several 
Councils.  It  was  ordained  at  Constantinople,  in  a.  d. 
381,  "That  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople  shall  hold  t\\e 
first  rank  after  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  for  Constantinople 
is  new  Rome."  This  decree  was  reiterated  and  more 
fully  explained  at  the  General  Council  of  Chalcedon,  a, 
D.  451.  The  fact  that  Rome  was  the  only  Apostolic  See 
in  the  West,  and  that  both  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  the  chief 
Apostles,  suffered  martyrdom  there,  also  contributed  to 
exalt  its  Bishop.    "The  reverence  paid  in  the  East  to 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE   POPE. 


105 


Alexandria  and  Antioch  and  Ephesus  and  other 
Churches  was  in  the  West  monopolized  by  Rome."  But 
as  Primus  he  had,  of  course,  no  canonical  jurisdiction 
outside  of  his  own  Diocese.  He  had  no  more  authority 
over  his  Episcopal  brethren  than  Bishop  AVilliams  of 
Connecticut,  the  present  Primate  of  the  American  Epis- 
copal Church,  has  over  Bishop  Leonard  of  Ohio. 

Papal  supremacy  developed  much  later  than  the 
primacy  and  was  limited  to  the  Western  Church.  As 
the  doctrine  of  infallibility  grew  out  of  the  widespread 
desire  for  an  unerring  religious  teacher,  so  that  of  the 
Pope's  right  to  universal  dominion  had  at  least  one  of 
its  roots  in  the  felt  need  of  a  Supreme  Ruler,  which  has 
manifested  itself  in  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Dispensa- 
tions, by  the  setting  aside  of  the  polyarchical  for  a  mo- 
narchical regimen.  God  provided  that  the  government 
of  the  Jewish  nation  and  Church  should  be  divided 
between  the  elders  of  the  twelve  tribes,  Himself  being 
Head  over  all.  A  similar  provision  was  made  by  Christ 
for  His  Kingdom,  which  is  a  continuation  and  develop- 
ment of  the  old  Church.  He  was  to  be  its  supreme 
Ruler  and  center  of  unity.  His  administratlA^e  repre- 
sentatives were  to  be  the  twelve  Apostles  and  their  suc- 
cessors. These  were  invested  with  equal  authority,  so 
that  in  their 'respective  fields  of  labor  they  were  quite 
independent  of  each  other. 

We  would  not  be  understood  to  teach  that  in  the 
early  Church  every  Bishop  was  a  law  unto  himself,  but 
that  none  had  a  right  to  meddle  in  the  administration 
of  another's  Diocese,  so  long  as  the  Faith  and  the  regu- 
lations  which  the  college  of  Bishops  had  decreed  in 
Council  assembled,  were  not  violated.  It  was,  in  the  na- 
ture of  things,  necessary  that  the  head  of  a  Diocese 
under  certain  circumstances  should  be  called  upon  by 
an  higher  authority  to  give  an  account  of  his  steward- 


N 


'f 


n 


i 


i 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

iMp.  An  atitlldllty  that  liioiild  be  recognized  as  final 
was  clearly  indispensable  to  the  well  being  of  the 
Church.  During  the  first  one  thousand  years,  this  was 
found  in  the  Ecumenical  Councils,  which  possessed 
both  legislative  and  judiciary  functions,  and  bore 
much  the  same  relation  to  the  Diocesan  and  Provincial 
Synods  that  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
bears  to  the  other  courts  of  the  country.  The  Scriptu- 
ral warrant  for  these  Councils  and  their  essential  value 
to  the  Church  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the 
Apostles,  themselves,  set  the  example  of  convening 
them  for  the  solution  of  difficulties  which  none  of  them, 
not  even  St.  Peter,  could  solve.  Western  Christians  re- 
peated the  fault  of  the  Jews  in  abandoning  God's  gov- 
ernment for  one  of  their  own  choosing,  when  they 
allowed  the  Popes  more  and  more  to  supplant  the  Coun- 
cils and  to  lord  it  over  their  brethren  of  the  Episcopate. 

The  circumstances  which  led  to  this  unfortunate  and 
sinful  exchange  of  the  Episcopal  pol^^archy  for  a  Papal 
monarch}'  were  very  much  the  same  in  both  cases.  It 
seemed  to  the  worldly  wise  to  be  a  necessary  expedient 
for  self-protection  against  heathen  enemies.  Of  course, 
when  the  Church  in  the  West  determined  to  have  a  king, 
it  had  no  difficulty  in  finding  a  candidate  who  was  head 
and  shoulders  above  his  rivals  for  the  throne.  All  eyes 
naturally  turned  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  who  had  long 
been  the  Primus  of  Christendom. 

But  the  exaltation  of  the  Papacy  is  by  no  means 
wholly  accounted  for  by  the  people's  desire  for  an  Eccle- 
siastical monarch.  They  were  indeed  ready  to  invest 
the  great  Bishop  of  the  Imperial  City  with  extraordinary 
judicial  powers  and  to  make  him  the  center  of  unity 
in  both  Church  and  State,  but  they  had  no  intention  of 
going  beyond  this.  The  greatness  which  they  may  be 
said  to  have  thrust  upon  him,  though  much  more  thaii 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


107 


.' 


the  primacy,  was  far  less  than  the  supremacy.  But  for 
the  ambition  of  the  Popes,  and  the  corrupt  methods 
which  the  degeneracy  and  ignorance  of  the  Dark  Ages 
made  it  possible  for  them  and  their  aggrandizers  to  em- 
ploy in  its  gratification,  they  would  never  have  become 
more  than  supreme  judges  in  cases  which  had  been 
carried  from  the  Diocesan  to  the  Archbishop,  and  from 
him  to  the  Patriarch,  without  settlement.  The  Church 
always  has  stood  in  need  of  a  court  from  which  there 
is  no  appeal  except  to  a  General  (buncil,  but  it  has 
never  required  a  king  other  than  the  One  who  ever  sits 
at  the  right  hand  of  God.  Fortunately  for  the  world 
the  Popes  have  not  and  never  can  attain  the  goal  upon 
which,  with  astounding  presumption,  they  have  fixed 
their  eyes.  Nor,  as  has  just  been  observed,  would  their 
efforts  to  reach  it  have  been  crowned  with  anything 
like  the  measure  of  success  which  has  been  achieved,  but 
for  the  unscrupulous  use  of  the  most  reprehensible 
means.  We  must  make  along  story  as  short  as  is  con- 
sistent with  clearness. 


When  at  leng-th  the  combination  of  circumstances  to 
which  we  have  referred  began  to  open  a  little  the  door 
of  dominion  to  the  ambitious  Popes,  they  found  them- 
selves constantly  embarrassed  by  its  rubbing  and  stick- 
ing against  the  grain  of  tradition  and  history  and  of 
the  ancient  Conciliary  decrees  and  Patristic  writings.  In 
fact,  it  was  discovered  that  everything  would  have  to  be 
either  planed  off  a  good  deal  or  made  over  altogether 
before  there  could  be  any  freedom  of  action.  Accord- 
ingly, work  was  begun  and  vigorously  continued 
throughout  the  Dark  Ages. 

From  first  to  last,  there  were  a  great  many  more  or 
less  systematic  efforts  to  reconstruct  history  in  the 


108 


OUE   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


interest  of  the  Papacy.  One  of  the  most  important  of 
these  was  made  as  early  as  the  beginning  of  the  third 
century,  in  a  work  of  fiction  which,  however,  purports 
to  be  the  autobiography  of  Clement,  who,  at  that  time, 
was  erroneously  supposed  to  have  been  the  first  occu- 
pant of  the  Roman  See.  The  object  of  the  unknown 
author  was  to  create  the  impression  that  the  honor  of 
being  the  first  among  equals,  which  had  long  been  con- 
ceded to  the  Bishops  of  Rome,  was  not  due,  as  had 
hitherto  been  believed,  to  the  political  greatness  of  the 
dty  over  which  he  presided,  but  to  the  circumstance 
that  St.  Peter,  who  was  represented,  contrary  to  fact, 
to  have  been  the  founder  and  Apostolic  head  of  the  See, 
had,  shortly  before  his  death,  consecrated  Clement  to 
succeed  him,  and  bequeathed  to  him  and  his  successors 
forever  the  headship  of  the  whole  Church. 

Before  the  close  of  the  ninth  century,  the  Popes,  by 
the  mutual  consent  of  the  disputants,  had  frequently 
acted  as  arbitrators  and  judges  in  cases  that  natural- 
ly should  have  come  before  the  other  Patriarchs.  A 
record  was  kept  of  the  decisions  rendered  in  these  ex- 
ceptional instances  of  appeal  to  Rome.  As  this  busi- 
ness added  greatly  to  the  dignity  and  revenue  of  the 
Roman  Bishops,  they  grew  more  and  more  anxious  to 
make  it  apyjear  that  they  were,  by  Divine  appointment, 
the  supreme  judges  of  Christendom.  So  they  made  a 
great  deal  of  the  romance  concerning  St.  Peter  and 
Clement.  But  in  pushing  their  claims,  at  every  step 
they  were  asked  such  questions  as  these :  If  the  right 
to  adjudicate  all  diflScult  cases  has  been  inherited  from 
St.  Peter  by  the  Popes,  why  is  it  that,  as  the  records 
show,  appeals  were  not  made  to  the  Holy  See  from  the 
beginning ;  and  why  do  the  canons  forbid  the  carrying 
of  cases  beyond  the  Patriarch  of  the  jurisdiction  to 
which  the  litigants  belong,  and  make  it  unlawful  for  all 


It 


JURISDICTION  OF  THE  POPBJ. 


109 


I    I 


I 


I 


Bishops,  Archbishops,  and  Patriarchs  to  exercise  any 
of  their  functions  beyond  theiu  canonically  defined  bor- 
ders? What  are  known  as  the  False  Decretals  of  Isidore 
assisted  greatly  in  getting  rid  of  these  embarrassing 
questions.  The  work  in  which  they  were  embodied 
contained  both  genuine  and  forged  canons  of  the 
Councils  and  judgments  of  the  Popes.  It  has  been 
established  beyond  dispute  that  they  contain  ninety- 
four  spurious  Papal  Decrees,  fifty-four  of  which  are 
attributed  to  the  first  thirty-five  Bishops  of  Rome. 
The  rest  are  distributed  along  the  intervening  period 
to  A.  D.  851,  so  as  to  make  the  chain  of  appeals  practic- 
ally continuous  from  St.  Clement  to  the  then  reigning 
Pope.  This  gross  forgery,  owing  to  the  uncritical  age 
in  which  it  was  perpetrated,  was  not  detected  and  ex- 
posed until  the  Reformation.  Though  the  Bishops  of 
Rome  had  very  little  if  anything  to  do  with  the  author- 
ship of  the  Pseudo-Clementine  literature  and  the  Isidor- 
ian  Decretals,  they  are  none  the  less  guilty,  for  they 
vouched  for  their  authenticity,  and  made  use  of  them 
to  change  the  government  of  the  Church  from  a  Divine 
polyarchy  to  a  human  monarchy. 

After  the  appearance  of  the  decretals  the  canons  of 
the  Councils  and  the  writings  of  the  Fathers  were  rap- 
idly more  and  more  corrupted  by  additions  and  sup- 
pressions. But  by  the  twelfth  century  such  tinkerings, 
extensive  as  they  were,  having  been  found  to  be  in- 
suflftcient,  Gratian  deliberately  undertook  the  work  of 
recasting  the  whole  canonical  code,  so  as  to  make  it 
fit  in  with  the  new  order  of  things.  Thomas  Aquinas, 
the  intellectual  giant  of  the  thirteenth  century,  ac- 
cepted, apparently  without  misgiving,  the  whole  mass 
of  false  Decretals,  counterfeit  Canons,  and  corruptions 
of  Patristic  writings,  which  had  accumulated  during 
five  hundred  years,  and,  after  fusing  them  together 


n 


OUB   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 

I 

into  a  homogeneous  whole,  and  rounding  out  the  work 
of  fraud  by  additions  from  the  spurious  Cyril  of  Alexan- 
dria,  built  upon  it  his  system  of  Papal  dominion  and 
infallibility  which  has  continued  to  this  day.  "John 
XXII.,  in  his  delight,"  says  "Janus,"  "uttered  his 
famous  saying,  that  Thomas  had  worked  as  many 
miracles  as  he  had  written  articles,  and  could  be  can- 
onized without  any  other  miracles,  and  in  his  Bull  he 
affirmed  that  Thomas  had  not  written  without  a  spe- 
cial inspiration  of  the  Holy  Ghost.  Innocent  VI.  said 
that  whoever  assailed  his  teaching  incurred  suspicion  of 
heresy." 

The  world  has  never  witnessed  such  gross  and  all 
pervading  literary  frauds  as  those  for  which  the  Papacy 
is  responsible.  Everything  which  they  and  their  ag- 
grandizers  touched  has  been  modified  so  as  to  square 
with  the  dogmas  of  universal  dominion  and  doctrinal 
infallibility.  An  old  author,  in  connection  with  what 
he  has  to  say  about  the  corruption  of  the  Fathers, 
gives  a  list  of  one  hundred  and  eighty-seven  treatises 
cited  by  Roman  writers,  about  the  spurious  character 
of  which  no  doubt  remains;  and  modern  criticism 
could  easily  add  to  the  number.  He  gives  also  a  list  of 
fifty  passages  corrupted  in  the  genuine  writings  of  the 
Fathers,  and  adds :  "  I  have  set  down  only  five  decades 
whereby  you  may  conjecture  of  the  rest,  which  for  brev- 
ity's sake  are  omitted." 

Not  even  the  Roman  Breviary,  or  Prayer  Book,  has 
escaped.  An  author  quoted  by  Canon  Gore  says :  "  The 
condemnation  of  Pope  Honorius  for  heresy  is  recorded 
in  the  Roman  Breviaries  until  the  sixteenth  century,  at 
which  period  the  name  of  Honorius  suddenly  disap- 
pears. The  theory  of  Papal  infallibility  was'  at  that 
time  being  rapidly  developed.  A  fact  opposed  it.  The 
evidencefor  the  fact  is  suppressed."  "I  have  before  me/* 


JURISDICTION    OF    THE    POPfi. 


Ill 


writes  P^re  Gratry,  "a  Roman  Breviary  of  the  year 
1520,  piinted  at  Turin,  in  which,  on  the  feast  of  St.  Leo, 
June  28th,  I  find  the  condemnation  of  Honorius:* In 
which  synod  were  condemned  Sergius,  Cyrus,  Honorius, 
Pyrrhus,  Paul  and  Peter  who  asserted  and  proclaimed 
one  will  and  operation  in  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ. 
I  open  the  Roman  Breviary  of  to-day,'" he  continues, 
"and  there  I  find  in  the  instruction  of  St.  Leo,  June 
28th :  *  In  this  Council  were  condemned  Cyrus,  Sergius, 
and  Pyrrhus,  who  preached  only  one  will  and  operation 
in  Christ.'  The  trifling  incident  of  a  Pope  condemned  for 
heresy  by  an  Ecumenical  Council  is  simply  omitted  by 
the  revisers  of  the  Breviary  in  the  sixteenth  century. 
Father  Garnier,  in  his  edition  of  the  Liber  Diurnus, 
says,  with  a  gentle  irony,  that '  they  omitted  it  for  the 
sake  of  brevity.'"  "One  of  the  enrichments  of  the 
Breviary,"  pointed  out  by  another  Roman  Catholic 
writer, "  was  the  putting  of  Satan's  words  to  our  Lord  in 
the  Temptation,  '  I  will  give  thee  all  the  kingdoms  of  the 
world,' into  the  mouth  of  Christ,  who  is  made  to  address 
them  to  Peter."  These  forgeries  and  mutilations  in  the 
interest  of  the  Papal  system  were  so  astonishing,  that 
the  Venetian  Marsiglio  thought  that  in  course  of  time 
no  faith  would  be  reposed  in  any  documents  at  all,  and 
that  so  the  Church  would  be  undermined.  "It  is  im- 
possible," as  Professor  Salmon  observes,  "to  think 
that  if  Roman  prerogatives  had  rested  on  any  Divine 
gift,  it  would  have  been  necessary  to  bolster  up  the  fab- 
ric with' so  enormous  a  congeries  of  fraud  and  lies." 

In  cases  wherein  the  light  of  modern  learning  and 
the  art  of  printing  have  made  it  impossible  to  effect  the 
necessary  changes,  the  books  have  been  placed  upon  the 
Index  of  works  which  may  not  be  read  by  Romanists. 
Indeed,  the  reading  of  any  book  or  article  which 
contains    anything    derogatory    to    Ultramontanism 


Ii1 


JiiiiiKitf 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


113 


18  forbidden  except  to  a  few  specially  licensed  contro- 
versialists.    The   Bible   itself  is   popularly  supposed, 
not  without  good  reason,  to  be  among  such  books. 
Certain  it  is  that  Scripture  reading  was  for  ages  dis- 
couraged, and  sometimes  absolutely  interdicted.    For 
instance  at  the  Council  of  Toulouse,  a.  d.  1229,  the  Laity 
were  forbidden  to  have  in  their  possession  any  copy  of 
the  books  of  the  Old  or  New  Testament  if  translated 
into  the  vulgar  tongue.    This  was  the  first  synodical 
prohibition;   there  had   been   no   instance   of  a   law 
since   the   days   of  the   emperors   which   showed   the 
same  hostility  to   the   Bible.     When   the   Council   of 
Trent  met,  a.d.  15G2,  the  first  business  taken  in  hand 
was  to  prepare  an  Index  of  prohibited  books.     The 
work  was  intrusted  to  a  committee  of  Bishops,  who 
reported,  concerning  the  Scriptures,  that  as  the  result 
of  experience  their  translation  into  the  vulgar  tongues, 
and   the  indiscriminate   use   of  them,    has   produced 
'*more  evil  than  good."     The  report  was  not  made 
until  there  was  no  time  left  for  its  consideration  by 
the  Council;  so  the  matter  was  committed  to  Pope 
Pius  IV.,  who  approved  the  part  in  which  we  are  here 
interested.    It  reads  as  follows:    ''Since  it  is  manifest 
by  experience   that   if  the  Holy  Bible  in  the  vulgar 
tongue  be  suffered  to  be  read  everywhere  without  dis- 
tinction, more  evil  than  good  arises,  let  the  judgment 
of  the  Bishop  or  inquisitor  be  abided  by  in  this  respect; 
so  that,  after  consulting  with  the  parish  Priest  or  the 
confessor,  they  may  grant  permission  to  read  transla- 
tions of  the  Scriptures  made  by  Catholic  writers,  to 
those  whom  they  understand  to  be  able  to  receive  no 
harm,  but  an  increase  of  faith  and  piety,  from  such 
readings;  which  faculty  let  them  have  in  writing.    But 
whosoever  shall  presume  to  read  these  Bibles,  or  have 
them  in  possession  without  such  faculty,  shall  not  be 


capable  of  receiving  absolution  of  their  sins,  unless  they 
have  given  up  the  Bible  to  the  ordinary." 


But  conclusive  as  are  the  foregoing  arguments 
against  the  claims  of  the  Papacy,  the  strongest  yet 
remains  to  be  presented.  It  is  based  upon  the  scandal- 
ous lives  which  many  of  the  Popes  have  lived.  For  how 
can  they  make  good  the  pretension  that  since  the  Ascen- 
sion they  stand  in  the  same  relation  to  the  Church  uni- 
versal as  our  Lord  did  to  His  Disciples,  unless  it  be 
shown  that,  like  Him,  they  have  also  been  a  perfect 
example  to  the  world  as  well  as  its  light  and  king?  As 
the  claims  of  Christ  could  not  stand  for  a  moment  but 
for  His  absolute  holiness,  so  the  assertion  that  the 
Popes  are  His  infallible  and  all  powerful  representatives 
must  fall  to  the  ground  if  any  of  them  can  be  con- 
victed of  sin.  Many  of  the  Bishops  of  Home  have  been 
in  all  respects  ornaments  to  the  Church  and  have  rend- 
ered her  inestimable  service.  I  would  rather  dwell  on 
the  virtues  of  these  than  upon  the  heresies,  frailties, 
and  immoralities  of  the  unworthy  occupants  of  that 
illustrious  Apostohc  See.  But  as  Professor  Salmon  says : 
*'  When  Rome  is  made  the  hinge  on  which  the  whole 
Church  turns— the  rock  on  which  it  rests— then  it  is 
necessary  to  give  proof  that  Rome  has  not  the  strength 
to  bear  the  weight  which  it  is  proposed  to  lay  upon  it." 
The  evidence  by  which  her  weakness  wilf  be  made 
manifest  shall,  for  obvious  reasons,  be  quoted  solely 
from  the  pages  of  her  own  sons.  I  shall  be  obliged  to 
suppress  some  of  the  passages  which  have  been  collected 
from  their  books,  because  they  contain  accounts  of 
crimes  too  revolting  for  mention  in  a  work  that  is  in- 
tended for  general  reading,  but  not  one  word  will  be 
added  from  Protestant  authors. 

C.  A.-8 


114 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


JURISDICTION    OF    THE    POPE. 


115 


The  learned   Cardinal   Baronius,  speaking  of  the 
Papal  Court  in  the  tenth  century,  says:  *' What  was 
then  the  semblance  of  the  Holy  Roman  Church?    As 
foul  as  it  could  be,  when  harlots,  superior  in  power  as 
in  profligacy,  governed  at  Rome,  at  whose  will  Sees 
were  transferred,  Bishops  were  appointed,  and,  what  is 
horrible  and  awful  to  say,  their  paramours  were  in- 
truded into  the  See  of  Peter;  false  Pontiffs  who  are  set 
down  in  the  catalogue  of  Roman  Pontiffs  merely  for 
chronological  purposes;  for  who  can  venture  to  say 
that  persons  thus  basely  intruded  by  such  courtesans 
were  legitimate  Roman  Pontiffs?    No  mention  can  be 
found  of  election  or  subsequent  consent  on  the  part  of 
the  Clergy;  all  the  canons  were  buried  in  oblivion,  the 
decrees  of  the  Popes  stifled,  the  ancient  traditions  put 
under  ban,  and  the  old  customs,  sacred  rite8,and  former 
usages  in  the  election  of  the  chief  Pontiff  were  quite 
abolished.    Mad  lust,  relying  on  worldly  power,  thus 
claimed  all  as  its  own,  goaded  on  by  the  sting  of  am- 
bition.   Christ  was  then  in  a  deep  sleep  in  a  ship,  when 
the  ship  itself  was  covered  by  the  waves  and  these  great 
tempests  were  blowing.    And  what  seemed  worse,  there 
were  no  Disciples  to  wake  Him  with  their  cries  as  He 
slept,  for  all  were  snoring.    You  can  imagine  as  you 
please  what  sort  of  Presbyters  and  Deacons  were  chosen 
as  Cardinals  by  these  monsters." 

Genebrardus,  Archbishop  of  Aix,  speaking  of  the  du- 
ration of  the  Papal  profligacy  which  Baronius  thus 
describes,  says :  **Thi8  age  has  been  unfortunate,  in  so 
far  that  during  nearly  a  hundred  and  fifty  years,  about 
fifty  Popes  have  fallen  away  from  the  virtues  of  their 
predecessors,  being  apostates,  or  apostatical,  rather 
than  Apostolical." 

Very  sad  is  the  picture  drawn  in  the  speeches  at  the 
Roman  Catholic  Councils  of  the  16th  century,  when  a 


powerful  but  unsuccessful  effort  at  reformation  was 
attempted.  The  speakers  made  avowals  and  charges  so 
outspoken  and  of  such  overwhelming  force  that  they 
cannot  but  amaze  us.  Their  descriptions  reproduce  in 
various  forms  the  same  idea:  ''  We  Cardinals,  Italian 
Bishops,  and  officials  of  the  Curia,  are  a  tribe  of  worth- 
less men  who  have  neglected  our  duties;  we  have  let 
numberless  souls  perish  through  our  neglect,  we  dis- 
grace our  p]piscopal  office,  we  are  not  shepherds  but 
wolves,  we  are  the  authors  of  the  corruption  prevalent 
throughout  the  whole  Church,  and  are  in  a  special 
sense  responsible  for  the  decay  of  religion  in  Italy."  Car- 
dinal Antonio  Pucci  said  publicly,  before  the  assembly 
of  A.  D.  1516:  "Rome,  and  the  Roman  Prelates  and 
Bishops  daily  sent  forth  from  Rome,  are  the  joint  causes 
of  the  manifold  errors  and  corruptions  in  the  Church ; 
unless  we  recover  our  good  fame,  which  is  almost  wholly 
lost,  it  is  all  up  with  us." 

*' Janus"  tells  us  that:  "The  means  used  by  the 
Popes  to  secure  obedience,  and  break  the  force  of  oppo- 
sition among  people,  princes,  or  Clergy,  were  always 
violent.  The  interdict  which  suddenly  robbed  millions, 
the  whole  population  of  a  country  —  often  for  trifling 
causes  which  they  had  nothing  to  do  with  themselves— 
of  Divine  Worship  and  Sacraments,  was  no  longer  suflS- 
dent.  The  Popes  declared  families,  cities,  and  states 
outlawed,  and  gave  them  up  to  plunder  and  slavery; 
as,  for  instance,  Clement  V.  did  with  Venice;  or  excom- 
municated them,  like  Gregory  XI.,  to  the  seventh  gener- 
ation ;  or  they  had  whole  cities  destroyed  from  the  face 
of  the  earth,  and  the  inhabitants  transported— the  fate 
that  Boniface  YIII.  determined  on  for  Palestrina." 

Macchiavellisays :  "  The  Italians  are  indebt^ed  to  the 
Roman  Church  and  its  Priests  for  our  having  lost  all 
religion,  and  devotion  through  their  bad  examples,  and 


i!l'n 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

having  become  an  unbelieving  and  evil  people.  The 
nearer  a  i^eople  dwells  to  a  Roman  Court  the  less  religion 
it  has.  Were  that  court  set  down  among  the  Swiss, 
who  still  remain  more  pious,  they  too  would  soon  be 
corrupted  by  its  vices."  Nor  was  a  more  favorable 
judgment  given  by  Macchiavelli's  fellow-citizen,  Guic- 
ciardini,  who  for  many  years  served  the  Medicean 
Popes  m  high  offices,  administering  their  provinces  and 
commanding  their  army ;  he  observes,  on  Macchiavelli's 
words,  that  ^^  whatever  evil  may  be  said  of  the  Roman 
Court  must  fall  short  of  its  deserts." 

The  corruption  of  the  Hierarchy  is  witnessed  to  in 
Rome  itself  by  that  triumph  of  Michael  Angelo's  genius, 
the  '^Last  Judgment,"  which  was  painted  for  the  Altar 
of  the  Sisdne  Chapel,  in  a.  d.  1541.    This  magnificent 
work,  according  to  all  accounts,  is  a  thrilling  prophetic 
parable,  which  the  Papal  Court,  in  its  stupid  debauch- 
ery,  was  incapable  of  comprehending.    It  portrays  to 
the  eyes,  in   awful  menace,  the  final   reckoning.     By 
including  some  of  them  among  the  damned,  the  saintly 
artist,  who  must  have  been  scandalized  at  what  he  con- 
stantly beheld  of  the  abomination   of  desolation  in 
the  temple,  wrote  ^^Tekel,"  in  vivid  and  unmistakable 
characters,  on  the  walls  of  the  Popes  and  Cardinals. 
Of  course,  those  who  saw  their  own  portraits  in  this 
terrible  caricature,  winced  a  little,  *'but  they  were  too 
torpid  to  comprehend  the  length  and  breadth  of  such 
a  prophecy.    A  day  of  retribution  was  close  at  hand. 
God,  in  the  great  Reformation,  was  arising  to  shake 
terribly  the  earth." 

Roman  writers  have  put  as  good  a  face  as  possible 
upon  this  unfortunate  showing.  Of  those  who  have 
exercised  their  ingenuity  to  this  end,  Baronius  has 
succeeded  as  well  as  any.  He  contends  that  inasmuch 
as  the  Church  and  Roman  Hierarchy  were  not  utterly 


JURISDICTION    OF   THE    POPE. 


117 


ruined  by  the  sins  of  the  Popes,  their  Divine  origin  and 
indestructible  character  are  manifest.  "If,"  the  ingen- 
ious Cardinal  asks,  "the  Papal  chair  was  filled  by  a 
succession  of  monstrous  men,  most  base  in  life,  most 
abandoned  in  morals,  and  in  every  way  most  foul,  if  it 
had  a  set  of  chiefs  whose  sins  would  have  brought  down 
judgments  and  utter  ruin  on  any  other  government, 
must  we  not  infer,  from  the  fact  of  the  Papacy's  having 
survived  such  a  state  of  things,  that  it  enjoys  the  spe- 
cial favor  or  blessing  of  Heaven?"  But  Baronius  was 
not  the  first  to  resort  to  this  paradoxical  makeshift ;  in 
fact,  he  only  restated  and  lent  the  weight  of  his  repu- 
tation to  an  explanation  which  had  long  exercised  a 
great  infiuence  over  the  illiterate  masses,  but  which,  in 
his  time,  was  fast  losing  its  influence  with  the  educated 
and  thoughtful. 

Boccaccio,  an  Italian  writer  of  the  fourteenth 
century,  should  have  been  canonized  by  the  Roman 
Church  for  the  support  which  her  corrupt  Bishops  long 
derived  from  his  account  of  "Abraham's  Conversion  to 
Christianity."  If  it  were  not  for  the  age  and  the  con- 
text in  which  the  narrative  appears,  it  would  seem  in- 
credible that  a  story  which  cannot  now  be  read  or  heard 
without  laughter,  should  ever  have  been  regarded  as 
a  satisfactory  illustration  of  the  way  in  which  the 
worst  Popes,  scarcely  less  than  the  best,  contributed 
to  the  Glory  of  God  in  the  upbuilding  of  His  Church. 
As  given  in  the  "Decameron,"  it  is  briefly  this: 
Abraham  was  a  Parisian  Jew,  who,  being  pressed  to 
embrace  Christianity,  declared  his  intention  of  visiting 
Rome,  in  order  to  determine  by  personal  investigation 
whether  the  morals  of  Christ's  Vicar  and  of  the  Cardi- 
nals and  Clergy  proved  the  superiority  of  their  Creed 
over  his  own.  His  Christian  friend,  intensely  desiring 
his  conversion,  was  hoiTified,  knowing  too  well  that  the 


118 


OUR   CONTROYERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


spectacle  of  sensuality,   avarice,   and   simony  which 
tainted  all  at  Rome,  from  the  least  to  the  greatest,  was 
better  calculated  to  make  a  Christian  turn  Jew  than  to 
induce  a  Jew  to  become  a  Christian.    But  Abraham 
could  not  be  dissuaded  from  going.  However,  it  turned 
out  better  than  there  was  reason  to  fear,  for  upon  his 
return  he,  after  all,  presented  himself  for  Baptism,  de- 
claring himself  convinced  of  the  Divinity  of  a  reli^on 
which  survived,  notwithstanding  that  its  chief  ministers 
were  doing  their  very  best  to  destroy  it.    ^'The  popu- 
larity of  this  tale  in  pre-Reformation  times,  shows  that, 
if  the  Bishop  of  Rome  was  then  believed  to  be  a  guide 
to  truth,  he  was  not  imagined  to  be  an  example  of 
moral  purity." 

A  brilliant  objector  against  the  doctrine  of  infallibil- 
ity, after  an  almost  brutal  exposure  of  the  monstrous 
crimes  of  the  Popes,  in  which  special  mention  is  made  of 
the  infamous  Alexander  XI.  and  John  XXIL,  sums  up 
his  argument  thus :    '*  If  you  declare  tlie  infallibility  of 
the  present  Bishop  of  Rome,  you  will  be  held  bound  to 
prove  the  infallibility  of  all  his  predecessors,  without  a 
single  exception.    But  can  you  do  this,  with  liistory 
lying  open  and  showing  as  clear  as  sunshine  that  the 
Popes  have  erred  in  their  teaching?  Can  you  do  it,  and 
maintain  that  Popes  who  were  guilty  of  avarice,  of  in- 
cest, of  murder,  of  simony,  were  nevertheless  Vicars  of 
Jesus  Christ  ?    Oh,  venerable  brethren,  to  maintain  this 
monstrous  thing  would  be  to  betray  Christ  worse  than 
Judas  did.    It  would  be  flinging  mud  in  His  face!    Be- 
lieve me,  venerable  brethren,  you  cannot  make  historv 
over  again.    There  it  stands,  and  there  it  will  stand 
forever,  to  protest   mightily   against  the   dogma  of 
Papal  infallil>ility.    You  may  proclaim  it  unanimously, 
but  you  will  have  to  do  without  one  vote,  and  that  is 
mine." 


III. 


ANGLICAN  ORDERS. 


BESIDES  the  consecration  of  oneself  to  the  Chris- 
tian ministry  and  the  spiritual  and  intellectual 
preparation  necessary  for  this  high  calling,  two 
things  always  have  been  required  in  every  branch  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  namely,  Apostolic  and  Canonical 
Ordination  to  the  office  of  Deacon,  Priest  or  Bishop, 
and  a  lawful  appointment  to  a  particular  field  of  labor. 
Upon  the  first  of  these  dejjends  the  validity  of  Sacramen- 
tal ministrations,  and  on  the  second  the  exclusive 
authority  and  submission  which  are  indispensable  to 
efficiency  and  harmony.  So  far,  there  is  no  difference 
of  opinion  between  Romanists  and  Anglicans.  Our  con- 
troversy is  concerning  the  question,  whether  or  not  we 
have  the  regular  Orders  and  commission. 

Romanists  represent  that  pre-Reformation  Bishops 
in  England  derived  whatever  authority  they  had  from 
the  Pope,  and  that,  now  that  he  has  withdrawn  that 
authority,  they  are  none  the  better  for  this  connection 
with  the  past.  Anglicans  reply  that  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land was,  in  its  origin,  independent  of  Rome  and  con- 
tinued so  for  hundreds  of  years.*  This  being  the  case, 
Canon  VIII.,  of  the  General  Council  of  Ephesus,  a.  d. 
431,  makes  the  interference  of  the  Pope  in  the  Ecclesias- 
tical affairs  of  England  unlawful,  and  annuls  his  bull  of 
excommunication.  This  canon  restrains  all  Bishops, 
not  excepting  the  Popes,  from  the  exercise  of  Episcopal 
functions  and  jurisdiction  in  any  Diocese  or  Province 
except  their  own.  Thus,  when  the  Pope  excommunicated 


*  Lecture  IV. 


(119) 


f 


■■L'l  .-IJ^  J»iiii. 


1! 


120 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WJTH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


121 


the  Church  of  England  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII. 
and  Elizabeth,  he  did  no  more  than  cut  himself  and 
his  Diocese  off  from  a  pure  branch  of  the  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church  of  Christ.  His  excommunication 
of  the  whole  Eastern  Church  some  four  centuries  before 
had  the  same  effect.  St.  Firmilian,  Metropolitan  of 
Ca^sarea  in  Cappadocia,  was  right  when  he  said  to 
Stephen,  Patriarch  of  Rome,  "Whilst  you  think  it  in 
your  power  to  excommunicate  all  the  world,  you  have 
only  separated  yourself  from  the  communion  of  the 
whole  Catholic  Church." 

During  the  fourth  and  fifth  centuries,  the  Church  was 
harassed  by  the  rise  of  many  grave  heresies.  In  this 
period  of  excited  disputation  the  weapon  of  excommuni- 
cation was  brandished  recklessly,  not  only  by  the  Popes 
of  Rome,  but  also  by  the  other  heads  of  Patriarchates, 
and  even  by  comparatively  obscure  Diocesans.  When 
there  was  danger  of  serious  corruption,  the  best  way  to 
guard  against  it  known  to  the  Ecclesiastical  authorities 
of  those  days,  was.to  cut  the  offender  off  from  fraternal 
intercourse  wi  th  the  endangered  Diocese  and  to  brand  him 
with  the  censure  called  anathema.  But  when  one  Bishop 
excommunicated  another,  it  never  occurred  to  the  ex- 
communicate that  he  and  the  Christians  of  his  Diocese 
were  cast  out  of  the  Catholic  Church.  It  required  the 
condemnation  of  a  General  Council  for  this.  With  but 
comparatively  few  exceptions,  the  cause  for  the  excom- 
munication was  too  trifling  to  commend  it  to  the 
attention  of  such  a  body.  The  dispute  was  therefore 
usually  settled,  and  the  parties  directly  concerned  recon- 
ciled, by  arbitration,  or  by  time,  that  great  healer  of 
petty  differences  and  alienations. 

It  seldom  happened  that  the  aggressor  in  an  excom- 
munication procedure  enjoyed  the  undivided  support, 
of  neighboring  Dioceses.    As  in  the  case  of  nearly  all 


disputes  about  little  matters,  there  were  two  sides  to  the 
question.  Often  the  Bishops  far  and  near  were  pretty 
evenly  divided.  This  was  frequently  so  when  the 
Bishop  of  Rome  was  the  excommunicator.  In  fact, 
there  is  more  than  one  instance  on  record  in  which  he 
was  so  clearly  in  the  wrong  as  to  be  obliged,  under  the 
pressure  of  public  sentiment,  to  annul  his  bull  or  at 
least  to  allovT  it  to  become  inoperative.  This  conclu- 
sively shows  that  excommunication  by  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  did  not,  in  the  early  days  of  Christianity,  sepa- 
'  rate  from  the  Church ;  and  if  it  did  not  do  so  then,  there 
is  no  reason  for  believing  that  it  did  in  the  sixteenth 
century  or  that  it  does  now.  It  must  be  remembered 
too,  in  this  connection,  that  the  argument  by  which 
Romanists  would  unchurch  Anglicans  proves  too  much. 
We  have  seen  that  the  power  of  loosing  and  binding 
was  given  to  all  the  Apostles  and  their  successors,  not 
to  St.  Peter  and  his  alone,  and  that  in  the  primitive 
Church  it  was  exercised  by  all  Bishops.  If,  therefore, 
our  Orders  are  to  be  regarded  as  invalidated  b}^  the  fact 
that  the  Pope  has  separated  himself  from  communion 
with  us,  their  own  must  be  similarly  affected  by  the  re- 
fusal of  the  great  Greek  Church  to  commune  with  Rome. 
Not  only  were  our  Orders  thus  canonically  protected 
from  any  invalidating  effect  of  the  Pope's  excommuni- 
cation, but,  at  the  time  when  his  final  bull  was  promul- 
gated, it  happened,  either  by  chance  or,  as  is  more  prob- 
able, by  a  Providential  election,  that  there  was  not  one 
of  all  the  English  Bishops  who  owed  either  his  appoint- 
ment or  his  Consecration  to  the  Pope  of  Rome.  None 
had  promised  obedience  to  him,  nor  derived  even  a 
show  of  authority  from  him.  "They  had  all  been  or- 
dained under  Edward  VI.,  before  Mary's  reign,  or  under 
Elizabeth,  after  Mary's  reign  was  over."  It  is.  sheer 
absurdity  to  pretend  that  the  Bishop  of  Rome  could 


122 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


123 


1^ 

m 


I 


abrogate  what  was  in  no  way  derived  from  him.  If  it 
were  not  for  the  Ephesian  Canon,  it  might  be  conceiv- 
able that  Rome  could  withdraw,  by  canonical  deposition, 
the  Apostolic  strand  which  we  have  through  the  Italian 
succession,  but,  even  then,  our  Bishops  could  trace  their 
spiritual  descent  through  two  and  probably  three  re- 
maining continuous  Apostolic  ancestral  lines,  namely, 
the  English,  the  Irish,  and  the  Saxon.  Na allegation  of 
loss  of  continuity  has  ever  been,  with  any  show  of  reason, 
urged  against  the  last  two  of  these.  And  unless  Arch- 
bishop Theodore  disregarded  the  precautionary  Canon 
which  requires  that  every  Bishop  shall  have  at  least 
three  Consecrators,  the  third  has  been  continued  also 
through  Chad,  who  was  elevated  to  the  Bishopric  of 
York  in  a.  d.  664. 

But  if  our  Orders  were  wholly  derived  through  the 
Roman  succession,  it  would  not  follow  that  we  must  be 
in  subjection  to  the  Pope  in  order  to  retain  a  valid 
Apostolic  ministry.  For  as  has  been  well  said:  '^The 
Consecration  of  a  Bishop  or  Archbishop  by  the  Pope, 
does  not  invest  him  with  authority  or  jurisdiction  over 
the  said  Bishop  or  Archbishop,  or  over  their  Diocese  or 
Province.  Otherwise  Virgilius,  Bishop  of  Aries,  in 
France,  by  consecrating  Augustine,  would  have  acquired 
jurisdiction  over  him,  and  over  Canterbury  likewise; 
and  also  Godwin  of  Lyons  by  consecrating  Bright wald, 
Theodore's  successor,  would  have  done  the  same.  Several 
Priests  in  Roman  Orders  are,  it  is  stated,  at  this  mo- 
ment incumbents  in  the  English  Church,  having  con- 
formed thereto.  Supposing  this  to  be  the  fact,  that 
would  not  make  their  parishes  Roman  parishes ;  and,  in 
like  manner,  a  number  of  Bishops,  with  an  Archbishop 
at  the  head  of  them,  would  not,  because  they  had  re- 
ceived their  Consecration  from  Roman  Bishops,  turn 
their  Dioceses  or  Provincesinto  Roman  ones.''  To  argue 


otherwise  would  prove  too  much  for  Romanists.  Many 
of  the  Popes  were  translated  to  Rome  from  the  French 
and  other  National  Churches— one  from  England.  Are 
we,  therefore,  to  conclude  that  the  foreign  Church  which 
happens  to  have  a  son  in  the  reputed  chair  of  St.  Peter 
is,  for  the  time  being,  entitled  to  rule  over  the  Roman 
Church?  If  so  the  '*  Holy  See "  must  always  be  subject 
to  some  jurisdiction  other  than  that  of  its  occupant, 
for  the  Pope  never  consecrates  or  appoints  his  successor. 

However,  the  Roman  strand  has  never  been  drawn 
from  the  Anglican  succession  by  any  Papal  deposition 
of  our  Bishops.  Though  the  Pope  withdrew  from  their 
Communion,  neither  he  nor  anybody  else  ever  deposed 
them.  Certainly,  without  canonical  deposition  and  deg- 
radation there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  nullification  of 
Holy  Orders.  The  learned  Roman  Catholic,  Courayer, 
in  his  unanswerable  work  in  defense  of  English  Ordina- 
tions, points  out  that  "when  the  Donatists  made  a 
schism,  the  succession  of  the  Episcopate  was  acknowl- 
edged in  them.  Yet  they  were  guilty  of  the  same  in- 
trusion with  which  the  English  are  reproached.  They 
had  erected  Altar  against  Altar;  they  had  put  them- 
selves in  the  place  of  the  Catholic  Bishops ;  their  title 
was  altogether  faulty,  and  they  were  equally  excom- 
municated and  irregular.  Nevertheless,  the  Catholic 
Bishops  acknowledged  in  them  the  validity  of  the 
Priesthood,  and,  far  from  disputing  their  succession, 
offered  to  yield  them  their  place,  provided  they  would, 
by  their  reunion,  terminate  the  schism.  We  cannot  re- 
fuse the  English  a  succession  of  the  same  nature,  sup- 
posing once  the  validity  of  their  Ordination,  which  the 
authors  of  the  objection  are  willing  to  admit." 

Besides,  when  Romanists  insist  upon  the  necessity  of 
submission  to  the  ''  Holy  See,"  we  can  quote  the  words 
of  a  Pope  to  one  of  our  Archbishops  of  Canterbury :  ' '  By 


i 

in 


ll 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

the  authority,"  said  he,  "of  the  blessed  Peter,  Prince 
of  the  Apostles,  to   whom  power  was  given  by  our 
Lord  to  bind  and  to  loose  in  heaven   and  on  earth, 
we,  however  unworthy,  holding  the  place  of  that  same 
blessed  Peter,  who  bears  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  of 
heaven,  grant  to  you,  Theodore,  and  your  successors, 
all  that  from  old  time  was  allowed,  forever  to  remain 
unimpaired  in  that  your  Metropolitan  See  in  the  city 
of  Canterbury.'-    This  grant  was  made  more  than  a 
thousand  years  ago.    Dr.  John  Henry  Hopkins'  witty 
remarks  upon  it  are  to  the  point:    **Our  modern  con- 
troversialists on  behalf  of  the  Pope  would  fain  make 
us  believe  that  this,  the  Pope's  promise  and  gift  '  for- 
ever to  remain  unimpaired,'  is  now  utterly  null  and 
void.    But  we  think  better  of '  His  Holiness '  than  that ! 
It  was  hardly  worth  while,  indeed,  to  lug  in  St.  Peter  as 
having  anything  to  do  with  conveying  to  Theodore 
*  all '  that  the  Archbishops  of  Canterbury  had  already 
been  enjoying  from  *old  time.'    It  sounded  generous, 
and  was  certainly  quite  safe,  however,  to  give  to  the 
Archbishop  what  belonged  to  his  See  anyhow.    It  was  a 
way  the  Popes  had.    But  if  there  was  anything  at  all 
in  the  gift  prospectively,  we  would  only  call  attention  to 
the  fact,  that,  as  the  Pope  gave  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury all  these  things,  in  the  name  of  Blessed  Peter,  and 
to  the  Archbishop's  'successors,'  *  forever  to  remain  un- 
impaired,' of  course,  if  there  is  any  truth  or  reality  in  a 
gift  from  a  Pope,  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  must 
retain  them  all  to  this  day.    To  deny  it,  and  maintain 
that  they  are  all  gone,  is  to  be  guilty  of  flat  blasphemy 
against  the  Pope!" 


Komanists  also  try  to  discredit  the  mission  of  the 
Clergy  of  our  Mother  Church  of  England,  by  disparag- 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


125 


ing  her  connection  with  the  state,  and  the  part  taken 
by  the  crown  and  civil  authorities  in  the  filling  of  va- 
cant Bishoprics  and  benefices.  They  never  tire  of  repre- 
senting that  Henry  VIII.,  after  breaking  with  Clement 
VII.,  styled  himself  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church,  and 
usurped  the  Ecclesiastical  government  which,  up  to 
that  time,  by  Divine  appointment,  had  devolved  upon 
the  Pope.  This  notion  is  entirely  erroneous.  *'We 
must  not  be  misled,"  says  the  learned  Canon  Dixou, 
"by  the  term  'supremacy,'  which  first  began  to  be 
applied  to  the  Papal  power  in  England  after  that 
power  had  been  taken  away.  It  was  not  applied  to 
the  Papal  power  so  long  as  it  existed,  while,  on  the 
other  hand,  it  was  always  applied  to  the  kingly  power, 
and  properly  expressed  the  nature  of  the  same.  The 
sovereign  was  at  all  times  the  head  of  the  realm,  both 
of  the  spirituality  and  the  temporality,  whether  or  not 
he  had  borne  a  title  to  express  his  spiritual  suprem- 
acy. In  the  laws  of  Edward  the  Confessor,  a.  d. 
1004-66,  he  was  termed  the  Vicar  of  Christ,  a  title  which 
seems  as  expressive  as  that  which  was  taken  by  Henry 
yin."  But  in  speaking  of  the  king'stitle,  candor  should 
induce  Eomanists  not  to  stop  short  of  the  important 
qualifying  clause,  ''as  far  as  is  permitted  by  the  law  of 
Christ.''  Perhaps  it  would  be  a  little  too  much  to  ex- 
pect them  to  add  Henry's  ofl^cial  explanation,  in  which 
he  disclaimed  any  intention  of  usurping  the  Spiritual 
government  of  the  Church.  *' It  were  absurd,"  he  says, 
''for  us  to  be  called  Head  of  the  Church,  representing 
the  mystical  Body  of  Christ."  He  restored  the  spiritual 
headship  to  the  Bishops,  convocations  and  Ecclesias- 
tical courts,  to  which  it  canonically  and  constitution- 
ally belonged.  There  is  one  more  fact  bearing  upon 
this  subject  to  which  Romanists  of  course  never  refer. 
The  title  which  is  such  a  stumbling-block  to  them  was 


If 


ill 


'"tm 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


dropped  by  Queen  Mary,  since  whose  time  it  has  not 
been  assumed  by  any  English  sovereign. 

Those  who  have  not  read  both  sides  might  suppose, 
from  the  representations  of  Ultramontanists,  that  the 
Bishops  of  England  and  her  colonies  derive  their  mis- 
sion from  the  King  or  Queen.  In  reality  jurisdiction  is 
given  at  Ordination.  The  crown,  as  represented  by  the 
Prime  Minister,  for  the  purpose  of  safeguarding  the  in- 
terests of  the  state,  of  which  the  Church  is  such  a  pow- 
erful factor,  simply  reserves  the  right  of  nomination. 
The  Bishop  elect  is  then  consecrated  by  order  of  the 
Archbishop  of  the  Province.  Thus  the  English  Bishops, 
like  those  of  any  other  branch  of  the  Church  Catholic, 
owe  their  Mission  to  Ecclesiastical  Consecration,  or,  in 
case  of  Missionary  Jurisdictions,  to  appointment,  by  the 
Metropolitan.  "In  sum,"  says  Bishop  Bramhall,  *'we 
hold  our  benefices  from  the  King,  but  our  offices  from 
Christ;  the  King  doth  nominate  us,  but  Bishops  do 
ordain  us." 

The  objection  to  the  mission  of  the  Anglican  Episco- 
pate and  ministry  upon  the  ground  of  Erastianism 
will  not  stand,  therefore,  even  so  far  as  England  is  con- 
cerned, and,  as  for  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  it 
has  no  foundation  whatever.  But  even  if  it  were  well 
taken,  Romanists  could  not  safely  make  much  of  it,  as 
we  would  not  be  slow  in  pointing  out  that  the  Popes 
were  for  several  centuries  created  by  the  Emperors. 
Much  of  their  jurisdiction  was  derived  from  the  same 
source.  For  example,  whatever  authority  they  exer- 
cised in  France  was  due  to  a  statute  of  the  Emperor 
Valentinian  III.,  which  runs  as  follows:  *'  We  decree,  by 
a  perpetual  sanction,  that  nothing  shall  be  attempted 
against  ancient  custom  by  the  Bishops  of  Gaul,  or  other 
Provinces,  without  the  authority  of  the  venerable  Pope 
of  the  Eternal  City ;  but  whatever  the  authority  of  the 


1 1 


I 


I 


i 
ill 
)i 

< 
Q. 

k 
0 

h 
Z 

hi 
0 

M 

0 
J 

< 

a 

0 

0 

i 

y 

i 

X 


•at 

i 

H 
■a 

< 

^3 


? 


a 
a 
o 


M 


I? 


-^       ^  - 


^ 


c» 


89 


21^^' 


iio 


■^  "*  rh      •^  86  ^ 

S5  2    a  a  !^ 


li  ^  H  00 

K  .M  OC  'm 


M 
H 

at 


00 

O 
o 


'O'd  X 

©CO. 

fc<  9  a? 

C3  CJ  o 
0=0 

©-o  2 
*"  a£ 

X)  a  h. 

•M     © 

©T3  « 

g  ©  © 

«  "  aS 


a 

O  !*'  I 


o  2n 


^^       1 

>i«^         """^^     !>• 

S     ST 

[       r    r-4 

IjQ            Co       df^t 

^fi         oO     lO 

|jQ             |A        _i4 

f-t       *-t    ^^ 

s^ 

'^i^ 

< 

i4 

a 

H 

& 

z. 

O 

H 

< 

s 

» 

M 

O 

Q 

O 

a 

»     Ed 

©  u*^ 

©  ©-4 

BO  ^   >" 

ts  ©w 

**_-  © 

*^  **  *« 

®  d  © 

d  on  d 
©  ©  3 

en  O  ^ 
©  08  d 

03   •  2 

^ds^. 


H 


5^5 

•^4  «fc4  fl»4 

52g 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


127 


) 


Apostolic  Chair  ordains,  shall  be  law  to  them ;  so  that 
if  any  Bishop  when  summoned  shall  omit  to  come  to 
the  court  of  the  Roman  Bishop,  he  shall  be  compelled 
to  come  by  the  governor  of  the  province."  "Thus," 
observes  Professor  Hussey,  "the Pope's  supremacy  was 
now  estabhshed,  not  by  the  law  of  Christ,  nor  by  a 
canon  of  the  Church  over  the  Church,  but  by  the 
Roman  law  over  the  dominions  of  the  Roman  em- 
peror of  the  West." 

Roman  Catholic  controversialists  have  tried  to  dis- 
credit the  English  Succession  by  affirming  that  the  reg- 
ister at  Lambeth  Palace,  recording  the  Consecration  of 
Archbishop  Parker,  was  a  forgery,  and  that  all  which 
really  took  place  was  a  mock  Consecration  at  the  Nag's 
Head  tavern  in  London.    It  was  said  that  Kitchin  and 
Scory,  with  Parker  and  other  Bishops  elect,  met  there, 
that  Kitchin,  on  account  of  a  prohibition  by  Bonner,  re- 
•  fused  to  consecrate  them,  that  Scory,  therefore,  order- 
ing them  to  kneel  down,  placed  the  Bible  on  the  head 
of  each  and  told  them  to  rise  up  Bishops.    But  this  rep- 
resentation  was    at    once  thoroughly    exploded    by 
Anglican  writers,  and  has  long  been  repudiated  by  all 
respectable  Roman  authors.    One  of  these,  Lingard, 
says :  "  Of  this  tale,  concerning  which  so  much  has  been 
written,  I  can  find  no  trace  in  any  author  or  document 
of  the  reign  of  Elizabeth.  I  should  not  hesitate  to  pro- 
nounce in  favor  of  the  Consecration,  even  if  all  direct 
and  positive  evidence  respecting  it  had  perished.    But 
there  exists  such  evidence   in   abundance."     And  an 
erudite  Roman  Catholic  Layman  writes:  "I  am  unable 
to  understand  those  who  maintain  that  the  Protestant 
Bishops  went  through  a  mock  consecration  at  a  tavern 
in  Cheapside.    If  there  is  one  historical  fact  for  which 


128 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


129 


1 1  ■■ 


the  existing  evidence  should  render  it  undisputed,  it  is 
the  fact  of  the  Consecration  of  Dr.  Parker  at  Lambeth, 
on  December  17, 1559." 

It  is  further  urged  that  Barlow,  the  chief  Consecrator 
of  Parker,  was  not  a  Bishop.  To  this  we  reply  that, 
whether  he  was  or  not.  Dr.  Parker  was  validly  conse- 
crated, because  three  other  Bishops,  whose  Ordination 
is  unquestioned,  laid  hands  upon  him  and  repeated  the 
words  of  Consecration.  But  there  is  no  reason,  except 
the  fact  that  the  records  have  been  lost,  for  the  asser- 
tion that  Dr.  Barlow  had  not  been  dulv  invested  with 
the  Episcopal  character.  If  Romanists  foolishly  insist 
that  this  not  unusual  circumstance  must  be  regarded 
as  conclusive,  we  will  meet  them  on  their  own  ground 
by  insisting  that  all  the  Popes  whose  records  of  Conse- 
cration are  not  extant,  and  there  are  many  such,  were 
merely  Laymen.  Ordination  papers  and  records  are  by 
no  means  the  onlv  sufficient  evidence  of  canonical 
ministerial  office.  In  the  case  of  Dr.  Barlow  there  is 
enough  besides  to  convince  Dr.  Lingard,  one  of  the. 
greatest  of  Roman  Catholic  historians,  and  many  other 
scholars  of  the  first  rank,  that  he  was  regularly 
consecrated.  "When,"  says  Lingard,  "we  find  Barlow 
during  ten  years,  the  remainder  of  Henry's  reign,  con- 
stantly associated,  as  a  brother,  with  the  other  con- 
secrated Bishops,  discharging  with  them  all  the  duties, 
both  spiritual  and  secular,  of  a  consecrated  Bishop, 
summoned  equally  with  them  to  Parliament  and  con- 
vocation, taking  his  seat  among  them,  according  to 
seniority,  and  voting  on  all  subjects  as  one  of  them,  it 
seems  most  unreasonable  to  sup])Ose,  without  direct 
proof,  that  he  had  never  received  that  sacred  rite, 
without  which,  according  to  the  law^s  of  both  Church 
and  state,  he  could  not  have  become  a  member  of  the 
Episcopal  body." 


Finally,  it  is  objected  that  the  Ordinal  of  the  first 
Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VL,  used  at  the  Consecration  of 
Archbishop    Parker    and    others   wlio   continued   the 
Anglican  Succession,  was  defective  in  that  the  w^ord 
" Bishop"  did  not  occur  in  the  formula  appointed  to  be 
said  at  the  laying  on  of  hands,  and  that  there  was 
nothing  in  any  part  of  the  Service  to  make  the  int-en- 
tion  of  consecrating  to  the  Episcopate  sufficiently  clear. 
The  answer  to  which  is  that  the  only  Sacraments  tied 
to  express  forms  of  words  and  particular  matter,  by 
our  Lord's  appointment,  are  Baptism  and  the  Euchar- 
ist.   Courayer  says  that  "  according  to  a  principle  now 
almost    universally  received  in  the  schools,  and  gen- 
erally  by   all    learned    divines,    imposition   of  hands 
and  prayer  are  the  only  essentials  of  Ordination,  and 
the  Ritual  of  Edward  has  preserved  both.    Therefore, 
the  Bishops  ordained  by   this  new  Ritual  are  truly 
Bishops,  and  this  new  Ordination  would  suffice  alone  to 
assure  the  succession  of  the  Episcopate."  The  omission 
of  the  word  Bishop  in  the  formula  repeated  at  the  lay- 
ing on  of  hands  does  not  make  the  purpose  of  the 
Ordination  indefinite,  when  all  the  circumstances  render 
the  intention  unmistakable.     The  following  rubrical 
direction,  which  occurs  in  the  Service  used  at  Dr.  Park- 
er's Consecration,  puts  the  intention  of  those  who  took 
part  beyond  dispute:    "After   the  Gospel  and  Credo 
ended,  first  the  elected  Bishop  shall  be  presented  by  two 
Bishops  unto  the  Archbishop  of  that  Province,  or  to 
some  other  Bishop  appointed  by  his  commission;  the 
Bishops    that   present    him   saying:    Most   Reverend 
Father  in  God,  we  present  unto  you  this  godly  and 
well-learned  man,  to  be  consecrated  Bishop."    Further 
on  we  find  this  rubric:     "Then   the  Archbishop  and 
Bishops  present  shall  lay  their  hands  upon  the  head 
of  the  elected  Bishop,  the  Archbishop  saying:   Take  the 


C.  A  .—9 


1 


130 


OTTR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ELECTRIC 
BATTERY 


Holy  Ghost,  and  remember  that  thou  stir  up  the  grace 
of  God  which  is  in  thee  by  imposition  of  hands ;  for 
God  hath  not  given  us  the  spirit  of  fear,  but  of  power, 
and  love,  and  of  soberness." 

It  should  be  observed  in  this  connection  that  the 
Edwardian  Ordinal  was  strictly  in  accord  with  the 
usage  which  universally  prevailed  until  the  twelfth  cen- 
tury, and  still  prevails  in  the  Greek  Communion.  If, 
therefore,  Archbishop  Parker's  Consecration  is  invali- 
dated on  account  of  the  form  of  words  used,  there  was 
no  valid  Ordination  of  a  Bishop  until  after  twelve  hun- 
dred years,  when  the  Latins  added  certain  novelties  of 
ceremony  to  the  ancient  usage.  But  as  the  Orders  of 
the  Greeks  are  acknowledged,  notwithstanding  their 
persistent  adherence  to  the  old  form,  it  is  difficult  to 
see  how  those  of  the  English  can  be  objected  to  on  this 
ground.  The  difficulty  is  increased  by  the  fact  that 
Pope  Pius  IV.,  by  his  envoy,  ofiered,  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  to  confirm  the  whole  English  Prayer  Book, 
of  course  including  the  Ordinal,  provided  the  Church  of 
England  would  be  reconciled  to  the  Pope,  and  acknowl- 
edge his  supremacy.  The  Roman  Catholic,  Father 
Courayer,  calls  attention  to  the  report  of  Lord  Camden 
to  this  effect,  and  also  to  Sir  Edward  Coke's  independ- 
ent and  solemn  statement  of  the  same. 

There  is,  then,  not  the  slightest  ground  for  doubt 
that  the  Apostolic  Succession  has  been  duly  transmitted 
through  Archbishop  Parker  and  the  Elizabethan  Bish- 
ops. But  even  if  the  transmission  of  valid  orders 
through  Archbishop  Parker  were  not,  in  so  far  as  mat- 
ters of  history  are  capable  of  mathematical  certainty,  a 
demonstrable  fact,  we  have  Archbishop  Laud  to  fall 
back  upon.  That  he  received  Episcopal  Consecration 
by  those  whose  Orders  were  valid,  has  not  been  and 
never  will  be  questioned.    Through  him,  quite  indepen- 


Diagram  showing  that  the  Anglican  Communion  through  Archbishop  Laud 
has  the  Apostolic  Succession  independently  of  Archbishop  Parker.  Ea^h  ring 
represents  a  Bishop  and  his  interlaced  succession  from  the  Apostles,  The  red 
Illustrates  the  succession  of  Archbishop  Parker.  It  will  be  seen  that  without 
it  the  present  Bishops  of  the  Anglican  Communion  could,  nevertheless,  trace 
their  succession  from  the  Apostles  through  Laud,  via  the  Bishops  of  Jerusalem, 
Wales,  Ireland,  and  Italy ;  for  it  is  evident  that  if  the  diagram  were  actually 
constructed  from  wire  rings,  that  an  electric  battery,  placed  at  the  ring  repre- 
senting the  Apostles,  would  send  a  current  around  that  including  the  present 
Episcopate  of  the  Anglican  Communion ;  and  this  it  would  do  through  the  iron 
rings  representing  the  Jerusalem  and  other  successions,  even  if  the  copper 
rings  representing  the  Parker  succession  were  removed. 


tf 


Pn 


$11' 


t0 


Oi  o 
JJP" 
Sail., 

O 


s,s 


R"^  Si  - 


Bi 


a,  ^  1^  ^ 
*, '-  ffi  ,  Q 
^S ,-  ™  o  t-  z 

D^w_;   O  <  O 


fi.  Bh  O4 


few  **ai 

MM     'M     iMl 


pa  Q  •** 

5"* 


!(,  **  O  S8 
O  OO  2 


S  H  ^" 

pi)  94  9^ 


■B 


H 

^^  m  Q£ 

i4  !s^  ***  r* 


Hi 

^  P  3 


3      **^ 


o 


H 

2 
o 

Sfi 


A* 


w 


*  ?3 

cl  ^ 
to  ^ 

g.rfg 

►J      .  ftt 

►*"^  Sim  3Q 


ffco 
o 
0% 


ft.  -< 

CO  — 


o 

£Q 


«  Li 


1 


U  SQ 

.0  3 


tap 


iBJjJ 


M* 


^  ^  >»  'I' 


lis 

M  .aC  bC' 

Pill llliiftiniiilllMIIII|||l!!|lpi|ipii 


00,  ^ 


?9' 
fSEQ 


Sa 


2-":    S  K  >»« 


ns  e:  s:  a: 


OS  ' 


«3 


i      . 


SI  §5 
Wi5< 

Ml   * 


o 


Cm 


23     tJ 


< 


»,<  "/     C,"  C'  6,'  0^ 


c  .   c     ** 

1^  "lis 

w  2  as  '-S  -o 

=  K  c  S  « 
^  '^>  fiS 

e  c  ai  W't3 

tic  r;  a.  4)  Q 

c;  -s  5  cj  S 

t^  sS  -"^        C 


f*  cs"!!  S) 


m\     0^     hm 


o  •        — 

-  S  "'S  2 

S§  . 

•-^  C  CO  D 

C  O  B  s  a> 

'»  15  S^  eS 

o  «  o        . 

Z*^  s  ep  n 

■3.2    i*!.© 

.2  bc>.2 
£  c  OS  «3 

5   .  -r  .(3 
J-  ci^  «  o 


o 


as  >»"    ^ 

^       '^  00  " 


S-    2  s- 

*^0  aoOg 

2«2Bfs« 

08  as  ^    »^  "J" 

SSsSg 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


131 


dently  of  Archbishop  Parker,  we  have  the  English,  the 
Irish  and  the  Italian  succession  and  probably  also  that 
of  the  Saxon.    This  is  clearly  shown  from  the  record  of 
Laud's  Consecration  as  Bishop  of  St.  David's,  which 
took  place  in  the  reign  of  King  Charles  I.    He  had  six 
Consecrators,  of  whom  Montaigne,  Bishop  of  London, 
and  Felton,  Bishop  of  Ely,  had  been  consecrated  on  the 
14th  of  December,  1617,  by  George  Abbot,  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury,  assisted  by  Mark  Antonio  de  Dominis, 
an  ex-Roman   Catholic   Archbishop.     Laud   therefore 
received,   through  Montaigne   and   Felton,  both   the 
English  and  Italian  successions.    He  had  also  the  Irish 
through  three  other  of  his  Consecrators,  John  Thorn- 
borough,  Bishop  of  Worcester,  translated  from  Limer- 
ick;   John  Howson,  Bishop  of  Oxford,  who  had  the 
Irish  succession  through  the  Archbishop  of  Armagh; 
Theophilus  Field,  Bishop  of  Llandaff,  one  of  whose  Con- 
secrators  was  the   Bishop   of  Derry.     Nine   Bishops 
survived  the  rebellion,  eight  of  whom— Juxon,  Duppa, 
Wren,  Skinner,  King,  Warner,  Roberts,  and  Frewen— 
had  the  succession  from  Laud ;  and  from  these  all  the 
Bishops    of  the    Anglican    Communion    derive    their 
Orders.    They,  therefore,  have  their  spiritual  descent 
from  Laud,  and  derive  through  him,  independently  of 
Archbishop  Parker,  the  three  successions,  English,  Irish 
and  Italian. 

An  able  writer  calls  attention  to  the  interesting  fact 
that  Roman  controversialists  never  attack  the  validity 
.  of  the  Orders  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  Ire- 
land. ^*In  fact,  there  can  be  no  question  about  them, 
as  they  are  derived  from  Connor's  Consecration  of  Arch- 
bishop Curwin  in  Queen  Mary's  reign.  This  has  a  vital 
bearing  upon  the  question  of  English  Orders  since  Irish 
Bishops  of  this  succession  took  part  in  the  Consecra- 
tion of  Archbishop  Laud.    Thus,  even  if  it  could  be  for 


ff 


III 


1 1 

I 


I 


132 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


133 


a  moment  admitted  that  there  was  any  doubt  of  the 
validity  of  Parker's  Consecration,  it  would  haveto  be  al- 
lowed that  the  defect  was  at  least  in  a  measure  rectified. 
A  Roman  Catholic  Archbishop,  who  had  connected  him- 
self with  the  Anglican  Church  and  received  an  appoint- 
ment to  an  English  benefice,  also  took  part  in  Laud's 
Consecration.  Absolutely  certain  as  the  Consecration 
of  Archbishop  Parker  is,  English  orders  do  not  stand 
or  fall  even  with  that." 

IV. 

LEO  XUrS  DECREE  OF  INVALIDITY. 

Not  a  few  in  both  the  Roman  and  Anglican  Com- 
munions have  been  looking  forward  with  considerable 
anxiety  to  the  result  of  the  Pope's  investigations  con- 
cerning the  validity  of  Anglican  Orders,  and  his  recently 
published  adverse  decision  will  of  course  settle  the  ques- 
tion with  the  rank  and  file  of  Romanists.    This  is  the 
decree:   "We  pronounce  and  declare  that  Ordinations 
carried  out  according  to  the  Anglican  Rite  have  been 
and  are  absolutely  null  and  utterly  void."    But  there  is 
nothing  in  the  long  and  intricate  arguments  of  the 
Bull  that  will  change  the  mind  of  a  single  scholar  of 
either  Communion.    It  throws  no  new  light  upon  the  sub- 
ject, and  does  not  raise  a  single  objection  that  has  not 
been  answered  a  thousand  times.    Perhaps  some  of  my 
readers  will  be  glad  to  know  that  the  Pope's  argu- 
ments are  all  anticipated  and  very  effectually  answered 
in  a  little  book,  entitled,  "What  Objections  Have  Been 
Made  to  English  Orders,"  which  is  published  by  the 
Society  for  the  Propagation  of  Christian  Knowledge.   In 
the  future  Anglican  Orders  will  of  course  not  have  so 
many  outspoken  champions  among  Roman  writers,  but 

"  A  man  convinced  against  his  wiU, 
Ig  of  the  same  opinion  still." 


There  are  many  learned  Roman  Catholics  who  will 
continue  in  one  way  or  another  to  make  felt  their  re- 
sentment at  the  scandalous  disregard  of  history  and 
canon  law,  which  the  Jesuits  have  manifested  all  along 
in  their  propaganda  against  the  ministry  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  of  the  English  race. 

It  may  turn  out  that  the  "Black  Pope"  and  his 
followers,,  by  practically  forcing  Leo  XIII.  to  declare 
against  Anglican  Orders,  have  done  our  Communion  a 
great  service.  There  have  been  a  considerable  number 
of  both  Clergymen  and  Laymen  whose  devotion  to  the 
idea  of  the  restoration  of  intercommunion  with  the 
Roman  Church  has  been  so  great  as,  in  a  few  instances, 
to  compromise  their  loyalty  to  the  great  Historic 
Church  of  their  race.  These,  as  their  leader.  Lord  Hal- 
ifax, admits,  will  now  be  forced  to  perceive,  what  their 
forbearing  Bishops  and  brethren  have  seen  all  along, 
that  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  the  unity  upon  which 
they  had  set  their  hearts  without  a  complete  and  un- 
conditional surrender  on  our  part  of  the  liberty  which, 
according  to  the  Ecclesiastical  Canons,  belongs  to  every 

National  Church. 

The  Pope's  decree  will  be  welcomed  cordially  by  many 
Episcopalians,  not  only  because  it  will  turn  the  faces  of 
their  infatuated  brethren  away  from  Rome,  but  also 
because  it  gives  them  possession  of  all  the  outposts 
around  which  the  battle  of  controversy  concerning  our 
Orders  has  hitherto  raged.  Since  the  publication  a  few 
months  ago  of  M.  Dalbus'  work  on  the  validity  of  An- 
glican Orders,  Ultramontanists  have  realized  that  there 
was  nothing  for  them  to  do  except  to  extort  a  decree 
from  the  "  infallible"  Pope  and  take  refuge  behind  it,  for 
it  appears  from  these  publications  that  the  controversial 
guns  of  every  other  parapet  have  been  silenced  by  our 
relentless  artillery,  reinforced  by  many  an  effective  shot 


134 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


135 


:|l 


. , 


II 


from  the  enemies'  own  ranks.  Those  who  are  familiar 
with  the  ground  upon  which  the  battle  between  Angli- 
cans and  Romanists  has  been  raging  for  three  centuries, 
will  be  greatly  surprised  that  the  Bull  contains  not  a 
word  about  the  "  Nag's  Head  "  or  Bishop  Barlow.  This 
gives  us  a  position  which  our  enemies  long  regarded  as 
their  Gibraltar. 

M.  Dalbus  is  the  pen  name  of  a  distinguished  French 
Priest  and  scholar,  the  Abbe  Portal.  His  work  waa 
honored  with  a  commendatory  letter  by  the  learned  Car- 
dinal Bourret,  and  a  favorable  criticism  by  the  great 
Abbe  Duchesne.  I  will,  in  part,  quote  Abbe  Duchesne's 
review  of  M.  Dalbus  as  condensed  in  the  Literary  Digest, 
because  comparatively  few  words  will  thus  suflSce  to  show 
what  both  have  to  say. 

Abb6  Duchesne  says:  "M.  Dalbus  begins  by  estab- 
lishing the  claim  that  Bishops  Parker  and  Barlow,  from 
whom  the  whole  of  the  Anglican  Clergy  derives  its 
Ordinations,  were  really  ordained ;  or,  at  least,  that 
there  is  no  ground  for  contesting  their  Ordination.  On 
the  other  hand,  the  Ritual  of  the  Anglican  Church  is 
substantially  similar  to  the  Ritual  of  the  Greek  Church, 
and  even  to  that  of  the  Latin  Churches  down  to  the 
twelfth  century.  Conclusion :  The  Ministers  of  the  An- 
glican Church  are  just  as  rightly  ordained  as  Gregory  of 
Tours,  Hincmar  of  Rheims,  and  other  Latin  Clergy  of 
ancient  times." 

It  is  difficult  to  see  how  the  Pope  could  be  induced  to 
take  the  stand  he  has  in  the  face  of  the  admissions  and 
contentions  of  many  of  the  most  scholarly  among  his 
own  officers.  He  passes  over  what  they  have  to  say 
with  the  remark  that  the  validity  of  Anglican  Orders  has 
been  maintained  by  *'some  few  Catholics,  chiefly  non- 
Enghsh,''  and  attributes  their  mistake  to  *' insufficient 
knowledge''  concerning  certain  documentary  evidence 


relating  to  the  decisions  of  his  predecessors.  Such  con- 
temptuous references  to  men  who  might  forget  more  than 
Leo  XIII.  ever  knew  and  still  be  better  furnished  than 
he  to  pass  upon  the  subject  in  question,  are  calculated 
to  make  the  blood  boil. 

'      As  the  Pope  seems  to  congratulate  himself  upon  the 
alleged  fact  that  the  Catholics  who  admit  the  vahdity  of 
Anglican  Orders  are  chiefly  -  non-English,"  we  will  here 
call  attention  to  a  remarkable  letter  by  an  English  Ul- 
tramontanist.    It  is  reprinted  in  full  by  Dr  Lee  in  the 
Appendix  to  his  great  work  on  "The  Vahdity  of  the 
Holy  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England."    The  following 
is  a  short  extract:    "Now,  my  own  conviction  has  al- 
ways been,  as  you  are  aware,  that  the  probability  in 
favor  of  English  Orders,  as  gathered  from  the  direct  evi- 
dence amounts  to  moral  certainty,  which  is  the  highest 
kind  of  certainty  attainable  in  such  questions.    I  have, 
therefore,  myself,  no  more  doubt  of  their  validity  than  I 
have  of  the  validity  of  the  Orders  of  the  Catholic  Church 
or  of  the  Greeks.    The  Jesuit  Missionaries  of  Elizabeth  s 
reio-n,  and  those  who  have  followed  in  their  footsteps 
since,'  thought  it  necessary  for  Catholic  interests  to  strain 
every  nerve  to  disprove  the  Anglican  Succession.  Hence, 
first  the  scandalous  invention  of  the  Nag's  Head  Fable. 
When  that  was  too  much  blown  upon  for  any  respectable 
writer  to  be  able  to  use  it,  the  mare's  nest  about  Bar- 
low's Consecration  was  thrust  to  the  front,  though  even 
if  his  Consecration  could  have  been  disproved  it  would 
have  had  no  real  bearing  on  Parker's,  for  of  the  Episco- 
pal Orders  of  his  three  other  Consecrators  there  can  be 
no  doubt.    When  that  broke  down,  the  Doctrine  of  In- 
tention was  attempted  to  be  worked  in  a  way  which, 
if  it  proved  anything,  would    shake  the  validity   of 
every  Sacrament  in  Christendom.     The  whole  history 
of  the  controversy  about  Anglican  Orders,  so  far  from 


1  ! 


1S3 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


187 


tending  to   shake   their   validity,  very  strongly  con- 
firms it.'' 

Many  of  the  brightest  lights  of  the  Eoman  Commun- 
ion have  held  and  are  holdingthese  views.    The  Rev.  M. 
R.  Butler,  in  his  "Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders," 
has  compiled  many  pages  of  extracts  from  the  writings 
of  more  than  thirty  of  the  most  eminent  Roman  Catholic 
authors,  who  admit  the  validity  of  our  ministry,  and  in 
some  cases  even  contend  for  it.    Among  those  who  have 
done  this  are  such  celebrated  names  as  Dr.  Nicholas 
Sanders,  Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Odescalchi,  Monseig- 
neur  De  Dominis,  Archbishop  of  Spalatro,  and  Primate 
of  Dalmatia  and  Croatia ;  Monseigneur  Jacques  Benigne 
Bossuet,  the  renowned  Bishop  of  Meaux ;  Monseigneur 
Harlay,  Archbishop  of  Paris;  St.  Alfonso  M.  Liguori, 
Bishop  of  Agatha,  and  founder  of  the   congregation 
of  the  Most  Holy  Redeemer,  and  the  celebrated  Galilean 
divine,  Le  Courayer,  who  wrote  a  dissertation  in  support 
of  Anglican  Orders  and  afterwards  a  defense  of  it,  which 
together  contain  perhaps  the  most  thorough  refutation 
of  Roman  attacks  which  has  ever  been  made. 

In  the  verdicts  rendered  in  the  case  of  Dr.  Stephen 
Gough,  we  have  the  deliberate  and  semi-oflicial  pro- 
nouncement of  the  Sorbonne  Faculty,  upon  two  occa- 
sions, in  favor  of  Anglican  Orders.  Dr.  Gough,  before 
entering  the  Church  of  Rome,  had  been  one  of  the  Chap- 
lains of  Charles  I.  His  ministrations  as  a  Roman  Priest 
were  in  the  Diocese  of  Paris.  He  insisted  that  the  Or- 
dination which  he  had  received  at  the  hands  of  an  Eng- 
lish Bishop  was  valid,  and  the  Archbishop  of  Paris  hold- 
ing the  same  view,  gave  him  a  cure  without  reordination. 
The  most  learned  Faculty  of  the  celebrated  Theological 
Seminary  of  the  Sorbonne  was,  however,  charged  with 
the  thorough  investigation  of  the  whole  subject  of  An- 
glican Orders.  After  spending  several  months  in  research 


and  conference  they  pronounced  them  unquestionably 
valid     But  after  a  time  the  misgivings  of  some  influen- 
tial  Ultramontanists  induced  the  Archbishop  to  re-com- 
mit  the  case  to  a  choice  number  of  the  great  Sorbonne 
Doctors.    These,  after  sifting  again  all  the  evidence, 
confirmed  the  verdict  of  the  preceding  committee,  and 
framed  a  report  which  had  the  efi^ect  of  silencing  all  op- 
position  to  Dr.  Gough.    This  testimony  to  the  vahdity 
of  Eno-lish  Orders  is  exceptionally  valuable,  because  it 
comes^^from  what,  during  several  centuries,  was  "the 
most  renowned  and  competent  theological  school  in 
Latin  Christendom." 

The  "Life  of  Archbishop  Tait"  contains  an  account 
of  a  very  important  communication,  received  by  the 
late  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  Dr.  Wordsworth,  from  some  of 
the  Bishops  who  were  attending  the  Vatican  Council, 
A  D  1870  in  which  it  was  signified  that  the  opposition 
to  the  Dogma  of  Papal  Infallibility  would  be  exceedingly 
erateful  for  the  moral  support  of  the  Anglican  Episco- 
pate Thus  the  validity  of  our  Orders  was  acknowledged 
by  the  Vatican  minority,  which,  so  far  as  learning  is 
concerned,  was  the  flower  of  the  Roman  hierarchy. 

Moreover,  by  declaring  Anglican  Orders  to  be 
totally  invalid  Leo  XHL  reverses  the  decision  of  Popes 
Julius  HL,  Paul  IV.,  Pius  IV.  and  Urban  VHL,  who 
admitted  their  validity.  The  evidence  of  this  state- 
ment will  be  found  excellently  summarized  and  well 
supported  by  quotations  from  and  references  to  origi- 
nal  authorities  in  the  Rev.  Mr.  Butler's  pamphlet  re- 
ferred to  above.  Our  space  will  admit  of  little  more 
than  a  bare  statement  of  the  facts.  ,  ^^  ,    . 

Pope  Julius  III.  addressed  a  brief  to  Cardinal  Pole  m 
the  year  1554,  desiring  him  to  absolve  and  reconcile 
the  Bishops  and  Priests  made  in  Edward  VI.'s  time, 
but  not  directing  him  to  reordain  them.    Leo  XIII. 


IBS 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN   ORDERS. 


139 


tries  hard  to  get  rid  of  this  embarrassing  fact  by 
maintaining  that  Julius  III.  at  the  restoration  of  the 
usurped  Papal  power  in  England  on  the  accession  of 
Queen  Mary  reinstated  only  the  Bishops  and  Clergy  who 
had  been  ordained  by  the  Roman  Ordinal.  But  the 
instructions  to  Cardinal  Pole,  the  Apostolic  Legate  to 
England,  nowhere  discriminate  against  those  who  had 
received  the  Edwardian  Ordination.  In  order  to  make 
it  appear  to  the  contrary,  the  Pope  and  his  advisers 
conveniently  lose  sight  of  the  fact  that  in  those  days  it 
was  not  uncommon  for  Laymen  to  nominally  hold 
•  vacant  benefices,  which  were  sometimes  of  considerable 
duration.  The  Bull,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  this  subject, 
is  a  restatement  of  the  argument  of  Canon  Moyes, 
"  who,  finding  a  man  described  in  Mail's  reign  as  never 
ordained  or  'no  minister'  calmly  puts  him  down 
among  those  whose  Orders  were  disallowed  because 
conferred  by  the  Edwardian  form.  Canon  Moyes'  logic 
is  of  the  most  refreshing  type,  since  to  him  '  ordained ' 
by  the  Edwardian  form  is  equivalent  to  *not  ordained 
at  all.'  Therefore,  also,  *  not  ordained  at  all '  is  equiva- 
lent to  *  ordained  by  the  Edwardian  Form.' " 

Though  during  Mary's  reign  many  of  the  Edwardian 
Clergy  were  reconciled  to  the  Pope  by  his  representa- 
tives and  satisfactorily  reestablished  in  their  benefices, 
there  is  no  instance  of  the  reordination  of  a  single 
Bishop,  Priest  or  Deacon.  Bishop  Bonner,  who  was 
high  in  favor  at  Rome,  on  the  14th  of  July,  1554, 
restored  his  beloved  colleague  Scory ;  the  sole  ground 
alleged  for  the  need  of  such  restoration  to  his  Episcopal 
office  being  his  marriage;  and  there  is  no  question 
that  Scory  was  consecrated  on  the  10th  of  August, 
1551,  with  the  Revised  Ordinal. 

Pope  Paul  IV.,  A.  D.  1555-59,  "established"  and 
"  confirmed  "  the  action  of  Julius  III. 


Pope  Pius  IV.,  A.  D.  1559-65,  invited  the  English 
Prelates,  as  Bishops,  to  join  in  the  deliberations  of  the 
Council  of  Trent.  No  Bishops  were  sent  from  England 
and  the  Council  expressed  amazement  that  the  English 
Bishops  did  not  even  send  a  letter  "to  excuse  thej 
absence  when  summoned  by  the  Vicegerent  of  Chnst, 
for  the  settlement  of  religion."  ,,    ,   .        „     a  ^ 

Pope  Urban  VIII.,  a.  d.  1623^,  twice  offered  a 
Cardinal's  hat  to  the  Anglican  Primate,  Archbishop 
Laud,  without  questioning  his  Orders. 

An  effort  to  disparage  Anglican  Orders  was  made  at 
the  Council  of  Trent,  not,  however,  upon  the  ground 
that  they  were  defective,  but  that  our  Episcopate  was 
not  in  subjection  to  the  Roman  Pontiff.  One  of  the  mem- 
bers maintained  without  contradiction  that  it  was  lor 
"this  one  reason  and  no  other"  that  the  Roman 
Church  argued  against  the  Bishops  of  England,  for 
thev  prove  that  they  have  been  called,  elected,  conse- 
crated and  given  mission."  The  Popes  regard  this 
Council   as  Ecumenical,   thus  giving  it  their  highest 

sanction.  ^   ,        - 

The  Popes  did  not  question  our  Orders  for  many 
years  after  we  had  cast  off  every  semblance  of  alle- 
giance to  them.     Once  and   again  they  signified   a 
wilHngness  to  restore  us  to  Communion  without  re- 
Baptism,  Confirmation  or  Ordination,  providing  only 
that  we  should  return  to  the  partial  subjugation  of  the 
Dark  Ages.    And  even  at  this  late  date  there  is  not  the 
least  doubt  in  the  minds  of  the  well  instructed  that, 
notwithstanding  his    recent  decree,  "His    Holiness" 
would  repeat  the  overtures,  looking  to  the  wholesale 
restoration  made  by  his  predecessors,  if  there  were  the 
slightest  chance  of  their  acceptance. 

We  submit  that  in  view  of  the  above  mentioned 
acknowledgments  of  his  predecessors  the  dogmatic 


140 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


141 


iiiil 


decree  of  the  present  Bishop  of  Rome  tells  more  against 
the  doctrine  of  infallibility^  than  against  Anglican  Ordi- 
nations. 

The  reasons  now  given  by  Leo  XIII.  for  declaring 
Anglican  Orders  to  be  invalid  are  only  two:  (1)  the 
defectiveness  of  the  Edwardian  Ordinal,  and  (2)  the 
want  of  the  requisite  Intention. 

1.  We  have  already  had  occasion  to  refer  at  some 
length  to  the  first  of  these  objections,  but  we  must  in 
this  connection  quote  a  few  sentences  from  what  Abb^ 
Duchesne,  the  most  celebrated  liturgiologist  of  the 
Roman  Communion,  has  to  say  about  it.  "  The  objec- 
tion drawn  from  the  modifications  in  the  Rituals  is  no 
more  admissible  than  the  other.  The  objection  con- 
cerns the  Ordination  of  Priests.  The  schoolmen  laid 
down  the  rule  that,  for  this  form  of  Orders,  the  essen- 
tial part  of  the  Rite  consists  in  the  delivery  of  the 
sacred  vessels,  and  in  the  words  which  the  Bishop  pro- 
nounces in  giving  them.  At  present,  this  system  is 
abandoned ;  it  is  too  clear  that,  to  maintain  it,  all  the 
Greek  and  Oriental  Ordinations,  and  even  those  of  the 
Latin  Church  before  the  eleventh  or  twelfth  century, 
would  have  to  be  considered  null." 

To  this  we  must  add  the  clear  statement  of  a  scholarl  v 
writer  in  the  English  Church  Times :  "  Words  which  the 
Romans  say  are  essential  to  a  valid  Ordination  of  a 
Priest  were  not  in  the  Ordinal  of  the  Western  Church  till 
the  tenth  century.  Before  that  period  the  words  of  '  a 
commission  to  Consecrate  the  Holy  Eucharist '  were  never 
given.  Nor  was  the  form  '  for  conveying  the  power  of 
absolution '  given  till  a  later  time.  That  is  completely 
modern.  The  actual  words, '  Receive  ye  the  Holy  Ghost : 
Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto  them ; 
and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained,'  are 
first  found  in  a  book  belonging  to  the  Cathedral  of 


Mayence,  of  the  thirteenth  century.    They  are  not  m  the 
early  English  manuscripts  of  Egbert,  or  Dunstan  or  the 
Winchester  Use.    They  are  not  in  any  of  the  foreign 
Ordinals  printed  by  Martene  before  the  twelfth  century 
Thev  are  not  in  the  old  Sacramentaries  of  St.  Gregory 
or  Gelasius.    Such  being  the  case,  and  as  the  Roman 
Bishops  and  Priests  receive  their  Orders  through  St 
Greaory,  according  to  their  present  contention  that 
the  om'ission  of  this  form  of  words  invalidates  a  pro- 
fessed Ordination,  they  should,  to  be  consistent,  con- 
clude that  their  own  Orders  are  null  and  void     We,  ot 
the  purer  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church,  believe  our 
Orders  to  be  valid  because  of  our  true  and  unbroken 
succession  from  the  Apostles,  and  because  the  Ritual 
used  at  the  time  of  our  Ordination  was  in  accordance 
with  the  ancient  use  of  the  Church  before  the  Medieval 

corruptions  set  in."  ,.    j..       j. 

2  We  may  also  answer  the  Pope's  objection  to 
Aneiican  Orders,  so  far  as  it  is  based  upon  lack  of  In- 
tention, by  a  quotation  from  the  profoundly  learned 
Abbfe  Duchesne:  "Intention  must  be  presumed  till  the 
contrary  is  proved.  Baptism  may  be  validly  conferred 
by  a  ijerson  who  knows  only  that  it  is  a  sacred  rite  by 
which  one  becomes  Christian.  In  the  same  way,  the  Angli- 
can Ordinations  have  always  been  performed  by  persons 
who  wished  to  make  Bishops  or  Priests,  and  so  on.  We 
ought  not  to  ask  more."  «mr.  t> 

As  one  of  the  critics  of  the  Bull  observes:  "ThePope 
has  not  the  hardihood  to  say  that  if  he  used  the  Angli- 
can Ordinal  it  would  not  make  a  Priest  or  a  Bishop,  and 
he  hardly  could  considering  how  many  of  his  predeces- 
sors in  primitive  times  were  ordained  and  consecrated 
by  forms  equally  elastic  and  indefinite,  but  he  does 
sav  that  the  excision  of  everything  in  the  Ordinal 
referring  to  sacrifice  clearly  shows  that  those  who 


mm  CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 

Cdffipiled  and  first  used  it  had  no  *  intention  of  making  a 
sacrificing  Priest.'  The  question,  then,  is  one  of  Inten- 
tion, and  here  the  Pope  gives  away  his  case,  for  he  ad- 
mits that  the  Intention  of  the  compilers  of  the  Ordinal, 
as  expressed  by  themselves,  was  to  return  to  primitive 
usage ;  his  words  are,  *  under  a  protest  of  returning  to 
the  primitive  form ; '  the  Intention  of  the  Ordinal,  there- 
fore, was  to  make  Priests  of  the  primitive  type,  and  if 
the  Intention  was  good,  the  Pope  does  not  venture  to 
deny  that  the  Orders  are  valid." 


In  times  gone  by  when  Denominationalists  taunted 
Episcopalians  with  the  fact  that  the  Church  of  Rome 
virtually  denied  Anglican  Orders  by  reordaining  Episco- 
pal Clergymen  who  go  over  to  her,  we  could  retort  that 
nevertheless  our  Ordinations  had  at  various  times  been 
regarded  as  valid,  and  that  as  a  whole  they  never  have 
been  officially  pronounced  invalid.  We  shall  now  be 
reminded  that  so  far  as  Rome  is  concerned,  we  stand  on 
the  same  footing  with  the  other  Protestant  bodies.  To 
this  we  will  reply  that  there  is  no  adequately  supported 
Btatement  in  the  Pope's  pronunciamento  which  goes  to 
show  that  the  status  of  our  Bishops,  Priests  and  Dea- 
cons is  not  historically  and  Canonically  what  we  have 
hitherto  held  it  to  be.  Our  arguments  will  still  be  strong 
enough  to  compel  many  of  the  leading  ministers  of  the 
various  Denominations  to  transfer  their  allegiance  to  the 
Catholic  Church  of  the  English  speaking  race.  Ever  since 
Colonial  times,  when  President  Cutler  of  Yale  College, 
with  several  of  the  Professors,  did  this,  the  procession 
has  been  continuous,  and  there  is  no  probability  that  it 
will  be  interrupted.  On  the  contrary,  the  statistics  show 
that  the  number  of  Denominational  ministers  who  make 
application  for  Holy  Orders  in  the  Church  is  increasing 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


148 


steadily.  I  know  the  Bishop  of  Ohio  almost  alwayshas 
from  one  to  four  of  such  on  his  list  of  candidates,  and  he 
might  have  more  if  he  could  accept  all  who  offer  them- 
selves. When  it  is  remembered  that  we  have  nearly  three 
hundred  Bishops  in  the  Anglican  Communion,  and  that 
most  of  them  have  more  or  less  of  the  same  experience, 
the  magnitude  of  the  reaction  towards  the  Mother 
Church  may  be  imagined.  Many  of  the  ministers  who 
have  their  faces  turned  homeward  are  far  above  the 
average,  and  not  a  few  of  them  rank  among  the  very 
first  in  their  respective  Denominations. 

The  decree  of  invalidity,  though  coming  as  it  does 
from  the  infallible  successor  of  St.  Peter,  will  not  go  very 
far  in  the  minds  of  most  Protestants  towards  counter- 
acting  the  impartial  and  weighty  testimony  of  such  men 
as  Dr.  DoUinger.    It  will  be  generally  recognized  that 
the  question  respecting  Anglican  Orders  is  one  to  be 
settled  by  the  facts  of  history,  not  by  intuition  or  in- 
spiration.   This  being  the  case,  Dollinger's  utterance 
will  command  the  respect  due  to  one  who  speaks  or 
writes  with  the  authority  of  an  expert,  and  consequently 
what  he  says  is  much  more  likely  to  influence  intelligent, 
sensible  people  than  the  decree  of  the  good  and  amiable 
Italian  Ecclesiastic,  who  enjoys  no  great  reputation  for 
learning,  and  owes  what  little  weight  it  will  have  to  his 
exalted  position.    At  the  *'  Reunion  Conference  "  held  at 
Bonn  in  A.D.  1874,  Dr.  Dollinger,  who  is  generally 
ranked  as  the  first  theologian  and  Ecclesiastical  histo- 
rian that  the  nineteenth  century  has  produced,  said : 

"  The  solution  of  the  question  depends  solely  on  an 
examination  of  historical  evidence,  and  I  must  give  it, 
as  a  result  of  my  investigations,  that  I  have  no  manner 
of  doubt  as  to  the  validity  of  the  Episcopal  Succession 
in  the  English  Church.  The  Ordinations  of  the  English 
Bishops  since  the  Reformation  were  first  assailed  by  a 


i 


liii'^; 


144 


©UR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    ROMANISTS. 


ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


145 


It   I 


BOW  exploded  story,  the  Nag's  Head  Fable,  and  then 
by  sundry  objections,  some  of  which  rested  on  utterly 
unfounded  suppositions,  while  others  were  quite  as  appli- 
cable, or  more  so,  if  any  importance  were  to  be  attached 
to  them,  to  the  Ordinations  of  Roman  Catholic  Bishops 
and  Priests.  Circumstances  occurred  in  the  Western 
Church,  before  the  Reformation,  calculated  to  raise  far 
more  serious  doubts  as  to  the  unbroken  succession  and 
the  validity  of  many  Ordinations  than  anything  which 
has  been  alleged  against  English  Orders." 

As  Anglicans  can  prove  that  their  Bishops  are  his- 
torically and  Canonically  in  unbroken  succession  from 
the  Apostles,  the  Pope's  pronunciamento  does  not  dis- 
turb us  in  the  least.    All  that  we  regret  is  that  it  will 
widen  and  deepen  the  gulf  between  Rome  and  the  rest  of 
Catholic  Christendom.    There  now  seems  to  be  no  pos- 
sibility of  the  reunion  of  Greeks  and  Anglicans  with 
Italians  for  a  long  time  to  come.  But  many  are  taking 
comfort  in  the  consideration  that  what  the  cause  of 
unity  loses  in  this  direction  will  be  compensated  for  by 
the   accelerated  drawing  together  of  the  rest  of  the 
Christian  world.    There  is  much  more  ground  than  ever 
for  the  hope  that  the  restoration  of  intercommunion 
between  Greek  and  Anglican  Catholics  will  take  place 
within  the  next  generation.    The  Greeks  will  not  fail  to 
observe,  and  the  observation  will  produce  righteous  in- 
dignation, that  the  Pope  of  Rome  is  killing  two  birds 
with  one  stone.    For,  if  our  Orders  are  invalid  because 
of  the  reasons  which  he  gives,  theirs  are  the  same,  and 
if  there  is  anything  in  the  proverbial  representation  that 
"misery  loves  company,"  the  decree  will  tend  to  bring 
the  great  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Communions  which  it 
affects  together.    Henceforth,  either  Constantinople  or 
Canterbury— more  probably  the  latter,  for  she  is  the 
centre  of  the  race  and  Church  that  are  rapidly  becoming 


dominant— will  supplant  Rome,  which,  by  the  indiscre- 
tion of  the  present  incumbent  of  the  reputed  Chair  of  St. 
Peter,  has  lost  the  golden  opportunity  of  becoming  the 
reconciler  of  divided  Christendom. 

The  reconciliation  and  bringing  back  to  the  Catholic 
fold  of  our  Denominational  brethren  probably  will  take 
much  longer  than  the  reunion  of  Anglicans  and  Greeks, 
but  the  Pope's  action  will  hasten  this  as  well,  and,  we 
believe,  make  its  accomplishment  for  the  most  part  pos- 
sible within  the  coming  century.  Whenever  in  the  prov- 
idence of  God  that  time  comes,  the  Italian  Church  will  be 
compelled  to  give  up  its  preposterous  claims  and  to 
form  one  division  of  the  great  reunited  Catholic  army 
which  will  then  march  on  to  the  rapid  conquest  of  the 
world  for  Christ. 

Although  the  limits  to  which  I  have  confined  myself 
will  not  admit  of  adding  to  or  expanding  the  foregoing 
arguments,  it  is  hoped  that  enough  has  been  said  to 
leave  no  room  for  doubt  that  if  a  General  Council  could 
be  assembled,  and  be  asked  to  decide  whether  or  not 
Anglican  Orders  are  valid,  the  vote  would  be  overwhelm- 
ingly in  the  affirmative.  We  should  be  morally  cer- 
tain of  the  unanimous  vote  of  every  branch  of  Catholic 
Christendom,*  except  the  Roman,  and  there  w  ould  be 
many  a  representative  of  that  Communion,  prob- 
ably the  majority,  certainly  the  choicest  of  them,  who 
would  cast  their  ballot  for  us. 


In  conclusion  let  me  say,  by  way  of  a  general  answer 
to  any  quibbles  which,  for  the  want  of  space,  have  neces- 
sarily failed  to  receive  attention  heie,  that  Romanists 
urge  no  objection  against  the  Anglican  Ministry  and 
Communion,  which  will  not  be  found,  upon  examiua- 

*  See  Appendix  XXVII. 
C.  A.— 10 


146  OUR    CONTBOVEKSY    WITH    KOMANISTS. 

men  bave  an Jtb.ng  to  to  ta  ^  ^^^^^^  ^^ 

'''TbroSar;trr=7ovt.^,- tb. 

me  on^iucii  i^  rinints  of  our  controversy 

tnkinff  UP  of  several  other  points  oi  oui  ^ 

Si  lolni...,  ,m™,.v:  !'"''':J,4°  *t:'„"S:;''S- 

,     ,1 ^^ooWi+a-  nr« vers  in  an  unknown  tui%uc  J 

and  other  saints ,  prd^ t?i »  111  i.„„4-;ofioTi    npii- 

r  ^  +V.O  tnn^t  cursorv  examination  ot  tiie  nay^i 
Ck  whi  ri  aTessible  to  all,  the  Deno.n.inatjona 
I7tly  see  that  none  of  these  Bo-an  eo„-upt.ons 

e..  be  fastened  -P-«:,  "^Z^^^^.  th^t  ^. 
has  been  said  to  convince  any  tu      ^    *         ,        ^  ||,, 
Anglican  an.l  Ron.an  ^omn.n..on.^^^^^^^^ 
and  to  show  that  we  are  none  the  less  Latno 

rr.rrrr.tr;'"^'a* 'rn,be  t  ap^a 

n'^f  oonfessin-  Christ  by  identification  with  some 
tkl  of  H     Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church,  he  can 

Se  no  mistake  if  he  allow  W™-»y«,^£i  fo  , 
+i.»r,rppk  and  Ann'lican  conception  of  the  uuircn,  loi, 
ut  that  of  eVtier  Denominationalism  or  Romanism, 
r^n  ac^ld  th  Holy  Scripture,  when  interpreted  m 
the  iShtonh;  history  of  the  earliest  and  purest  Chns- 

tian  ages. 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


LECTURE  III. 

Our  Controversy  With  Deno/^inationalists. 

I.  Christ  Founded  a  Visible  Church. 

II.  Perpetuated  by  Successors  of  the  Apostles. 

III.  The  Appointed  Ark  of  Salvation. 

IV.  The  Depository  of  Sacramental  Grace. 
V.  Objections. 


(147) 


AUTHORITIES. 


CoiT,  Puritanism. 

CoTTERiLL,  Bp.,  Gcnesis  of  the  ChurcB. 

CoxE.  Bp,  ApoUos,  or  the  Way  of  God. 

Eagar,  The  Christian  Ministry  in  the  New  Testament. 

Gore,  Canon,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry 

Hammond,  What  Does  the  Bible  Say  About  the  Church  ? 

Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church  ?  .    ,    ^^  .  ^.     ..^ 

Sammond',  English  Nonconformity  and  Christ  s  Chnstian.ty. 

Hammond,  The  Christian  Church:  What  Is  it/ 

Ingram,  England  and  Rome. 

Marshall,  Notes  on  the  Catholic  l^piscopate. 

Morse,  Apostolical  Succession. 

Mountfield,  The  Church  and  Puritans. 

Neal,  Puritans.     (2  Vols.) 

Se.bury,  Lectures  on  Haddon's  Apostolical  Succession. 

SeIbury,  Introduction  to  the  Study  of  Ecclesiastical  Polity. 

Shields,  The  Historic  Episcopate. 

W^EST,  The  Kingdom  of  Heaven  upon  Earth. 

PAMPHLETS. 

McIlvaine,  Bp.,  The  Origin  and  Design  6f  the  Christian  Ministry. 
Thompson,  Bp.,  Concerning  the  Kingdom  of  God 
Thompson,  Bp.,  The  Protestant  Episcopal  Qhurch  and  Her  Rela- 
tion to  Other  Bodies. 

4f 

MISCELLANEOUS. 

Pittas  Street  Chapel  Lectures. 

Library  of  the  FATHERS-Oxford  Edition. 

The  Church  Defense  Institution     Handy  Volume. 

The  Doctrine  of  the  Apostolic  Succession. 

Tracts  for  the  TiMES-Apostolic  Succession. 


■!l 


Our  Controversy  with  Denomina- 

tionalists. 

HAVING  grown  up  in  one  of  the  many  communities 
of  Ohio  in  which  the  Episcopal  Church  is  not 
represented,  I  well  remember  the  astonishment 
produced  in  my  mind  by  the  first  tractates  concern- 
ing the  Church  which  fell  into  my  hands.    They  were 
Bishop  Randall's   *'Why  I  Am    a   Churchman"    and 
Bishop  Thompson's  "  First  Principles."    The  idea  that\ 
some  Churches  are  Divine  Institutions,  and  others  only 
human  societies  was  to  me  altogether  new  and  prepos- 
terous ;  so,  also,  was  the  doctrine  that  the  Gospel  rehgion 
and  salvation  are  inseparably  connected  with  the  his- 
toric Church  of  Christ.    All  I  had  previously  heard  or 
read  led  me  to  believe  that  Christianity  was  essentially 
doctrinal  and  spiritual,  and  only  incidentally  institii- 
tional.    To  me  religion  was  a  faith,  an  experience,  a  life 
with  which  the  Church  and  the  Sacraments  had  noth- 
ing to  do,  except  in  so  far  as  they  contributed  to  keep 
up    enthusiasm    and    to    prevent    from    backsUding. 
This  is  the  view  of  nine-tenths  of  the  people  in  the 
various  Denominations.     Hence   they   cannot   under- 
stand the  position  of  Churchmen,  and  think  that  all 
that  we  have  to  say  about  the  Church  and  her  three- 
fold ministry  coming  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles,  is 

so  much  trifling. 

An  editorial  in  a  recent  number  of  a  widely  circu- 
lated religious  paper,  speaking  of  the  now  famous  essay 

-  (149) 


■p 

/ 


150 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH 


\ 


I 


i!' 


V. 


on  "The  Historic  Episcopate,"  accuses  its distfnguished 
Presbyterian  author,   Professor  Shields,  of  surrender- 
ing *' the  entire  Protestant  position  in  the  declaration 
that  the  institutions  of  Christianity,  its  ministry  and 
Sacraments,  are  revealed  in  the  Sciiptures  no  less  than 
its  doctrines."    "  No  Protestant,"  warmly  contends  the 
gifted  editor,  "if  he  is  Protestant  on  principle,  and  un- 
derstands his  Protestant  principles,  will  accept  an  His- 
toric Episcopate  as  essential  to  the  Church  of  Christ; 
for  he  holds  that  the  only  thing  essential  to  that  Church 
is  loyalty  to  Christ,  who  is  the  living  and  ever-present 
Head,  and  therefore  needs  no  Vicar  or  series  of  Vicars; 
and  he  holds  that  the  true   bond    of  Church  Unity  is 
Spiritual  and  not  Ecclesiastical."    He  then  goes  on  to 
say  in  almost  so  many  words  that  Christ  did  not,  as 
Episcopalians  would  have  non-Episcopalians  believe, 
organize  an  Ecclesiastical  society,  founding  it  upon  the 
twelve  Apostles  who  had  authority  to  appoint  their 
successors,  a  society  that  he  intended  should  be  the 
depository  of  His  special  grace  and  the  revelation  of 
His  truth.    A  forcible  writer  in  another  popular  reli- 
gious  paper  says:     "Denomi nationalists  think  that 
1  Christianity  is  not  concerned  with  Primacies  and  Apos- 
^  tolic  successions,  that  Christianity  is  a  matter  of  the 
heart  and  loyalty  to  Jesus  Christ  and  love  to  God  and 
man ;  and  that  all  the  machinery  that  goes  with  the 
Church  is  but  a  greater  or  lesser  convenience  or  burden. 
They  are  satisfied  with  the  Kingdom  of  God,  which  is 
righteousness  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost." 

"^In  order  to  secure  further  reading  from  those  who 
thus  flatly  deny  the  premises  upon  which  the  chief  ar- 
guments of  the  remainder  of  the  book  are  based,  it  is 
^necessary  to  turn  aside  at  this  point  for  the  purpose  of 
^proving  four  propositions,  namely:  (1)  Christ  founded 
a  visible  organic  society.    (2)  This  society  has   been 


DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


151 


perpetuated  through  duly  constituted  successors  of  the 
Apostles.  (3)  This  Apostolic  Church  is  the  appointed 
ark  of  Gospel  salvation,  and  only  by  entering  it  can  a 
l)erson  place  himself  in  assured  covenant  relationship 
with  God.  (4)  This  Church  is  also  the  sole  depository 
of  Sacramental  grace. 


i 


But,  l)ef()re  entering  upon  the  task  of  establishing 
these  propositions,  a  preliminary  remark  is  necessary  in 
explanation  of  the  fact  that  our  arguments  to  a  consid- 
erable extent,  will  be  based  upon  inferences  drawn  from 
the  Scriptures  and  Patristic  writings  rather  than  upon 
quotations  that,  in  so  many  words,  declare  the  truth  for 
which  we  contend.    This  is  because  the  Church  had  ex- 
isted for  a  number  of  years  before  the  earliest  of  these 
productions  were  penned.    "The  Bible,"  says  an  author, 
quoted  by  the  Bishop  of  Ohio,  "was  not  put  together 
till   the  Council  of  Carthage,  a.  d.    397.     When   the 
Nicene  Creed  was  formulated,  Scripture  was  never  even 
appealed    to.    The  three  hundred  and  eighteen  Bish- 
ops were  asked  singly  concerning  each  article  of  the 
Apostles'  Creed,  what  its  meaning  was,  according  to 
the  tradition  handed    down  in  his  Church.     Seventy 
years  afterward   it  was  found   that   every  particular 
of  the  Doctrine  was  registered  somewhere  or  another 
in  the  written  Code,  and  thus  it  became   an    axiom 
that  whatever  claimed  to  be  an  article  of  belief,  must 
also   be   tested    and    proved    by   the   written    word." 
So,  also,   Bishop   Thompson:    "The   Church  was   al- 
ready organized,  and  at  her  appointed  work  within 
a  year  after  the  Ascension.    Men  were  admitted  into 
her,  and  trained  and    taught  within   her,  heard   the 
Gospel,   'The  whole  counsel  of  God,'  believed  it.  and 
lived  and  died  by  it,  before  the  first  line  of  the  New 


\M 


it)<* 


OWE   CONTROVERSY    WITH 


DENOMI  NATIONALISTS. 


153 


ii 

FIK 
1 1! 


Testament  was  penned.  We  cannot  expect,  therefore, 
to  find  in  the  New  Testament  a  formally  drawn  up 
constitution  of  the  Church.  The  book  was  not  first 
written,  and  the  Church  organized  according  to  a  plan 
laid  down  on  paper  beforehand ;  but  the  Church  was 
first  organized,  and  then  the  book  was  written  be- 
cause the  Church  needed  it— required  a  written  record 
of  the  Gospel  she  was  teaching.  The  Church  produced 
the  New  Testament,  and  not  the  New  Testament 
the  Church." 

And  when,  at  length,  the  wntings  of  the  Apostles  and 
Fathers  began  to  come  forth,  they  were  addressed  to 
cono-renations   or  to   individuals,    who   w^ere   already 
familiar  with  the  organization   instituted   by  Christ. 
Ifc  was,  therefore,  in  no  case  the  object  of  the  author  of 
these  writings  to  announce  the  existence  of  the  Church, 
or  to  set  forth  and  explain  its  constitution.    The  Gos- 
pel writers  give  fragmentary  and  supplementary  ac- 
counts of  our  Lord's  life  and  works  for  the  purpose  of 
persuading  the  reader  to  accept  Christ  as  the  promised 
Messiah,  or  of  building  up  believers  in  faith  and  right- 
eousness.    The   Epistles  are,  for  the  most  part,  con- 
cerned with  the  correction  of  irregularities  in  life  and 
doctrinal  errors.  Even  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  though 
professedly  historical  in  character,  throw    only  an  in- 
direct light  upon  the  questions  which  we  are  to  discuss. 
What,  in  this  respect,  is  true  of  the  New  Testament 
is  equally  true  of  the  Fathers.    They  have  nothing  to 
say  directly  on  the  various  points  of  controversy  be- 
tween the  Romanists  or  the  Denominationalists  and 
ourselves,  for  the  simple  reason  that  the  Romanism 
and  Denomination alism  against  which  Catholic  Chris- 
tians of  both  the  Greek  and  Anglican  Communions  pro- 
test, had  respectively  no  existence,  for  a  thoi|§§nd  and 
fifteen  hundred  years. 


As  the  Church  antedates  the  Sacred  and   Patristic 
writings,  and  as  they  were  addressed  to  those  who  had 
her  constantly  before  their  eyes,  it  is  not  to  be  expected 
that  they  wilf  contain  a  systematic  treatise  concerning 
Ecclesiastical  polity  and  other  matters  about  which 
there  was  little,  if  any,  dispute,  until  many  centuries 
later.    Under  the  circumstances  we  cannot  reasonably 
expect  to  find  much  beyond  incidental  remarks  and 
hints,  which,  taken  in  connection  with  the  Christian  in- 
stitution and  faith  that  have  come  down  to  us  from  the 
earliest  times,  will  enable  us  to  determine,  with  more  or 
less  certainty,  what  were  the  original  organization  and 
doctrines.    The  messages  of  our  Presidents  do  not  con- 
tain a  history  of  our  origin  as  a  nation,  nor  do  they  ex- 
plain our  form  of  government.    Nevertheless,  if  all  our 
histories  were  to  be  lost,  these  documents,  if  preserved, 
would  enable  our  descendants  to  determine  whether  or 
not  they  had  departed  from  the  constitution  by  which 
wo  have  been  governed  since  the  time  of  Washington. 
If  a  thousand  years  hence  it  should  be  pretended  by 
some  that  up  to  the  year  1896  our  form  of  government 
was  an  absolute  monarchy,  the  assumption  would  be 
refuted  by  innumerable  quotations  from  the  Presiden- 
tial messages.    The  same  would  be  true  if,  on  the  other 
hand,  any  should  maintain  that,  until  our  day,  there 
were  forty-nine    independent    nations   in   the   United 

States. 

Now  what  it  is  desired  that  the  reader  shall  clearly 
perceive  is  this— though  the  argument  by  w^hich  it 
would  be  shown  that  the  America  of  the  nineteenth  cen- 
tury was  one  nation  under  a  Democratic  form  of  gov- 
ernment, would  be  chiefly  inferential,  it  would  not- 
withstanding be  strong  enough  to  convince  the  great 
majority  of  our  descendants  of,  say,  the  thirtieth  cen- 
tury.    No  doubt  the  monarchists  on  the  one  hand  and 


n 


184        00E   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

the  nwlthmtiomiUsts  on  the  other,  would  quote  in  their 
support  many  isolated  passages  from  the  messages,  but 
the  advocates  of  Democracy  and  Unity  would  insist 
that  such  quotations  must  be  interpreted  in  harmony 
with  the  general  drift  of  the  utterances  of  the  Presidents 
and  with  the  fact  that  the  government  which  had  come 
down  to  them  was  unified  and  representative,  and  that 
this  inestimable  inheritance  still  had  the  cordial  sup- 
port of  nine  out  of  every  ten  of  all  the  millions  of  Amer- 
ican citizens. 

The  arguments  of  Anglican  and  Greek  Christians,  so 
far  as  they  are  based  upon  the  New  Testament  and 
Patristic  writings,  are  confessedly,  to  a  great  extent, 
inferential.    We  infer  that  the  extremes  of  Romanism 
and   Denominationalism    are   wrong,   because  in  the 
literary  remains  of  the  Apostolic  age  and  first  centuries, 
there  is  no  trace  either  of  the  Papacy  or  of  non-Epis- 
copal sectarianism,    while    what    light    is    indirectly 
thrown  upon  the  subject  reveals  the  truth  of  our  con- 
ception of  the  Church.    Nor  does  the  doctrine  concern- 
ing the  Church  for  which  we  contend,  stand  alone  iu 
being  largely  supported  by  inferences  drawn  from  the 
Bible  rather  than  by  clear,positive  statements.    On  the 
contrary  some  of  the  chief  doctrines  set  forth  in  the 
Creeds  and  Confessions  of  Faith  are  inferred  from,  rather 
than  expressly  taught  by,  the  Scriptures.  This,  for  ex- 
ample, is  true  even  of  the  fundamental  doctrine  of  the 
Trinity.    Indeed  it  would  seem  to  be  a  characteristic  of 
God's  revelation,  whether  through  His  works  or  in  His 
Word,  that  only  so  much  is  made  manifest  as  will  en- 
able the  earnest  student  to  arrive  at  something  like 
Batisfactory  conclusions  concerning  the  rest.    Both  the 
scientist  aiid  the  theologian  must  ascend  the  ladder  of 
inferences,  the  one  to  learn  the  mysteries  of  creation, 
and  the  other  those  of  redem  ption .  Of  course  the  former 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE   CHURCH. 


155 


must  make  sure  that  the  lower  end  of  the  ladder  stands 
upon  some  well-ascertained  law  of  nature,  and  the 
latter  that  it  is  planted  upon  the  sure  Word  of  God,  for 
only  so  will  the  upper  end  lean  securely  against  the 

truth. 

But  we  by  no  means  rest  our  case  wholly  upon 
Biblical  and  Patristic  inferences.  W^e  also  appeal  to 
liistory  which  we  think  bears  testimony  for  us  and 
against  tliem.  Ilowfar  we  are  right  in  this  has  already 
appeared  so  far  as  Romanism  is  concerned.  Unless  we 
are  greatly  mistaken,  it  will  be  seen  as  we  proceed  that 
Denominationalism  is  equally  unable  to  endure  the 
historical  test. 


I. 

CHRIST  FOUNDED  A   VISIBLE  CHURCH. 

NO  attentive  reader  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  whether 
Episcopahan  or  non-Episcopalian,  denies  that 
the.^'  are  filled  with  prophecies  of,  and  references 
to  something  which  is  variously  denominated  "the 
Ki^igdom,"  'Hhe  Church,"  ''the  Body,"  and  "the  Bride 
of  Christ."  Moreover,  there  is  no  difierence  of  opinion 
touching  the  fact  that  Christ  would  have  all  men  to  be 
His  Disciples,  and  followers  of  His  precepts  and  ex- 
ample; and  that  those  who  do  His  will  are  so  united  to 
Him,  and  stand  in  such  close  relationship  to  each  other 
that  they  constitute  a  separate  and  distinct  family,  in 
the  world,  but  not  of  it.  All  alike  hold  that  there  is  a 
vast  invisible  society,  composed  of  true  behevers  and 
the  pure  in  heart,  the  number  of  which  no  man,  but 
God  only,  can  tell.  But  though  all  who  confess  the 
name  of  Christ  go  together  thus  far  in  the  interpreta- 
tion of  the  phrases  just  mentioned,  the  Denominational 
minority  separate  from  the  Catholic  majority,  when  the 


156         OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

latter  contend  that  the  expressions  have  primary,  if  not 
sole,  reference  to  a  divinely  constituted  visible  organi- 
zation, the  constituency  of  which  may  be  determined  as 
certainly  as  that  of  the  United  States  or  of  any  civilized 
commonwealth. 

Now  which  of  these  views  is  right?    Of  all  religious 
questions  this  is  at  the  present  time  the  one  of  the  most 
world-wide  and  intense  interest,  for  upon  its  answer  de- 
pends more  than  upon  anything  else  the  reunion  of 
English-speaking  Christians.    As  the  writer  of  one  of 
the  editorials  quoted  above  says:    ^'The  consumma- 
tion  of  Church  Unity  must  wait  until  Protestant  [non- 
Episcopalian]  Christians  are  convinced  that  Christ  insti- 
tuted an  Ecclesiastical  society  into  which  every  follower 
of  His  should  enter."    The  answer  to  the  question. 
Did  our  Lord  found  such  a  society?  like  all  the  points  of 
dispute  between  Denominationalists  and  Episcopalians, 
must,  of  course,  be  determined  by  a  study  of  the  Scrip- 
tures in  the  light  of  the  Primitive  Fathers  and  Eccle- 
siastical History.    I  say  Scripture  in  the  light  of  the 
Fathers  and  history,  because,  though  the  texts  which 
can  be  quoted  in  support  of  the  institutional  concep- 
tion of  Christianity,  are  as  numerous  and  conclusive  as 
those  that  might  be  cited  in  proof  of  almost  any  of  the 
fundamental  articles  of  the  Christian  Faith,  yet  if  we 
confined  ourselves  to  them  and  to  dogmatizing  about 
them,  the  argument  would  be  comparatively  weak  and 
unsatisfactory,  because  large  parts  of  the  Sacred  Record 
which  more  or  less  clearly  favor  our  conclusion,  would 
not  be  taken  intp  the  account. 


Starting  then  with  the  Scriptures  as  a  basis,  let  us 
proceed  to  determine  whether  or  not  the  mission  of 
Christ,  as  non-Episcopalians  claim,  simply  was  the  pro- 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


157 


mulgation  of  a  system  of  philosophy  and  doctrine, 
which,  at  the  Ascension  being  left  to  itself,  or  to  such 
voluntary  associations  as  His  Disciples  might  see  fit  to 
form,  should  leaven  and  regenerate  the  human  race;  or 
whether,  as  is  claimed  by  Episcopalians,  He  made  pro- 
vision through  a  visible  organic  society  for  the  pres- 
ervation and  universal  dissemination  of  the  knowledge 
of  His  revelation,  precepts,  and  example,  and  for  the 
conveyance  of  His  enabling  grace  to  behevers,  who, 
through  the  instrumentality  of  the  Sacraments,  are  by 
the  Holy  Ghost  joined  to  Him  in  living  union  as  the 
husbandman  unites  the  graft  to  the  tree  or  vine. 

That  the  society  instituted  by  Christ  was  a  visible 
organization  rather  than  a  school  of  philosophy,  may 
be  inferred  from  the  prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament 
relating  to  the  Messiah.  According  to  them  one  of  the 
chief  reasons  for  His  coming  was  to  restore  the  throne 
of  David  and  to  establish  an  everlasting  kingdom. 
Now  the  Davidic  Kingdom  w  as  an  organized  visible  in- 
stitution. Indeed,  in  the  nature  of  things,  there  could 
be  no  such  thing  as  an  unorganized  kingdom,  or  an  or- 
ganized kingdom  which  would  be  invisible.  There  can 
be  no  question  that  the  Messianic  prophecies  lend  their 
support  to  the  Episcopalian  rather  than  to  the  De- 
nominational conception  of  the  Christian  society.  The 
same  is  true  of  the  names  by  which  this  society  is  re- 
ferred to  in  the  New  Testament  Scriptures, "  the  Kingdom 
of  God,"  **  the  Church  of  Christ,"  "the  Body  of  Christ," 
**  the  Bride  of  Christ."  These  phrases  all  refer  to  a  visible 
organism  between  which  and  an  undefined  school  of  phi- 
losophy there  is  no  possible  correspondence.  Moreover, 
in  the  parabolic  teaching  of  our  Lord  and  the  Apostles 
this  society  is  compared  to  many  things  which  are 
visible,  and  more  or  less  highly  organized.  It  is  like  *'a 
field,"  "a   vineyard,"    ''a  mustard   tree,"  "a   net," 


7 

,4 


158 


OUK    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DEXOMINATIONA  LISTS. 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE   CHURCH. 


159 


"leaven,"  *'a  city  set  on  a  hill,"  "the  human  body,"  "a 
household,"  "a  sheepfold,"  and  so  on.  Surely  it  will  be 
admitted  that,  if  Christ  intended  simply  to  preach  the 
Gospel  and  leave  it  to  spread  through  all  the  world 
without  the  aid  of  an  institution,  His  doctrine  mip^ht 
have  been  more  aptly  illustrated;  but,  on  the  other 
hand,  if  it  was  His  intention  to  found  a  visible  society  in 
which  the  Gospel  should  be  preserved  during  all  the  ages 
and  disseminated  throughout  the  world,  no  better 
illustrations  are  conceivable. 

It  has  been  held  apparently  upon  good  ground,  that 
at  least  one  of  the  similitudes,  the  parable  of  the  leaven, 
favors  the  Denominational  conception  of  an  invisible 
Church.  It  is  maintained  that  the  leaven  works  unob- 
served until  the  whole  lump  is  leavened.  But,  though 
this  be  true,  the  leaven  itself  is  visible  as  are  also  the 
meal  into  which  it  is  put  and  the  woman  who  kneads 
the  dough.  If,  therefore,  the  parable  of  the  leaven  illus- 
trates the  mysterious  secret  workings  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  it  nevertheless  lends  its  support  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  ordinarily  His  operations  are  through  the 
visible  agencies  of  the  Church  and  her  ministry. 

When  our  Lord  said  that  He  would  build  His  Church 
upon  the  foundation  of  faith  in  His  Divinity,  He  had 
reference  to  a  visible  organization.  This  is  evident  from 
the  fulfillment  of  the  promise  of  which  we  read  in  the 
Acts  of  the  Apostles.  On  the  Day  of  Pentecost  three 
thousand  were  added  to  the  Church.  This  proves  that 
the  membership  of  the  society  founded  by  Christ  may 
be  known,  for  it  can  be  numbered,  and  that,  therefore, 
the  society  itself  is  visible. 

Again,  the  Church  of  Holy  Scripture  is  not,  as  De- 
nominationalists  say,  a  human  organization,  founded 
by  the  voluntary  coming  together  of  Christians ;  but  it 
is,  as  Episcopalians  and  the  representatives  of  every 


branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  hold,  a  Divine  institution, 
membership  in  which  is  necessary  on  the  part  of  all  who 
would  become  Christians.  This  appears  from  its  name, 
Ecclesia,  which  means  an  assembly  of  those  who  have 
been  called.  Christ  established  a  Church,  and  made  it 
the  duty  of  its  charter  members,  the  Apostles,  to  go  in 
person,  and  in  the  persons  of  their  representatives  and 
successors,  into  all  the  world,  and  by  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  to  call  all  men  into  it.  Those  who  accepted 
the  good  news  were  to  be  admitted  into  the  Kingdom 
by  Baptism,  and  to  be  retained  in  it  so  long  as  they 
maintained  fellowship  with  the  Apostles  by  holding 
their  doctrines,  joining  in  the  prayers,  and  partaking  of 
the  Eucharistic  meal. 

"Men  speak,"  says  the  Bishop  of  London,  "as  if 
Christians  came  first,  and  the  Church  afterwards;  as  if 
the  origin  of  the  Church  was  in  the  wills  of  the  indi- 
vidual Christians  who  composed  it.  But,  on  the  con- 
trary, throughout  the  teaching  of  the  Apostles,  we  see 
that  it  is  the  Church  which  comes  first,  and  the  mem- 
bers of  it  afterwards.  Men  were  not  brought  to  Christ, 
and  then  determined  that  thev  w  ould  live  in  a  com- 
munity.  Men  were  not  brought  to  believe  in  Christ  and 
in  the  Cross,  and  then  decided  that  it  would  be  a  great 
help  to  their  religion  that  they  should  join  one  another 
in  the  worship  of  the  Father  through  His  Name.  In  the 
New  Testament,  on  the  contrary,  the  Kingdom  of  Hea- 
ven is  already  in  existence,  and  men  are  invit;ed  into 
it.  The  Church  takes  its  origin,  not  in  the  will  of  man, 
but  in  the  will  of  the  Lord  Jesus  Christ.  Everywhere 
men  are  called  in;  they  do  not  come  in,  and  make  the 
Church  by  coming.  The}^  are  called  into  that  which  al- 
ready exists ;  they  are  recognized  as  members  when  they 
are  within;  but  their  membership  depends  upon  their 
admission,  and  not  upon  their  constituting  themselves 


160         OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A     VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


IGl 


a  body  in  the  sight  of  the  Lord.  In  the  New  Testament 
the  Church  flows  out  from  the  Lord,  not  flows  into 
Him.  In  the  New  Testament,  the  ministers  are  sent 
forth  to  gather  the  children  of  men  within  the  fold,  and 
are  not  simply  selected  by  the  members  of  the  Church  to 
help  them  in  their  spiritual  life." 

*' Jesus,"  says  another  able  writer,  "never  speaks  of 
the  Kingdom  as  something  which  men  could  constitute 
for  themselves;  it  must  come  to  them."    And  Dr.  Milli- 
gan,  a  distinguished  Scotch  Presbyterian  professor  and 
author,  has  brought  out  this  point  with  perfect  clear- 
ness. ''  The  true  idea  of  the  Church  on  earth,"  he  writes, 
"is,  therefore,  not  that  of  a  body  starting  from  earth 
and  reaching  onwards  to  a  heavenly  condition,  to  be 
perfectly  attained  hereafter.    It  is  rather  the  idea  of  a 
Body  starting  from  Heaven,  and  so  exhibiting,  amidst 
the  inhabitants  and  things  of  time,  the  graces  and 
privileges  already  ideally  bestowed  upon  it,  that  it  may 
lead  the  world  either  to  come  to  the  light  or  to  condemn 
itself  because  it  loves  the  darkness  rather  than  the  light, 
its  deeds  being  evil.    It  will  follow  that  the  community 
thus  constituted  must  be  the  visible  representative  of 
our  Lord,  while  He  is  Himself  invisible,  and  that  to  it 
must  be  committed  the  work,  which,  in  personal  pres- 
ence with  us.  He  can  no  longer  do.     As  the  Father 
sent  Me,  so  send  I  you— Prophets,  Priests,  and  Kings- 
envoys  of  the  Father  through  the  Spirit,  proceeding 
from  the  Father  and  the  Son." 

The  name  given  by  Gentiles  to  the  followers  of  Christ 
also  favors  the  Anglican,  rather  than  the  Denomina- 
tional, conception  of  our  Lord's  mission.  ''  The  Disciples 
were  called  Christians  first  in  Antioch."  The  form  of 
the  word  Christ mni  indicates  their  adherence  "not  as 
Disciples  to  the  founder  of  a  school— in  that  case 
it  would  have  been  Christ ici— hut  rather  as  partisans 


to  a  leader  and  commander.  The  Christians  were  not 
merely  people  of  a  certain  way  of  thinking,  suggested 
to  them   by  Christ;  they  were  a  party  who  wanted 


Christ  to  be  King." 


Denominationalists  endeavor  to  support  their  theory 
of  the  Church  by  such  texts  as  "The  Kingdom  of  God 
is  within  you."  "  The  Kingdom  of  God  is  not  meat  and 
drink,  but  righteousness  and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy 
Ghost."  "For  in  Christ  Jesus  neither  circumcision 
availeth  anything  nor  uncircunicision,  but  faith  which 
worketh  by  love."  "Christ  sent  me  not  to  baptize  but 
to  preach  the  Gospel."  "The  Church  of  God  which  he 
purchased  with  His  blood."  "He  is  the  Head  of  the 
Body,  the  Church."  "  We  are  come  to  the  Church  of  the 
first  born  who  are  enrolled  in  Heaven . "  "  Whenever  two 
or  three  are  gathered  together  in  my  name,  there  am  I 
in  the  midst  of  them."  "  Jesus  said,  Forbid  him  not,  for 
there  is  no  man  that  shall  do  a  miracle  in  My  Name 
that  can  lightly  speak  evil  of  Me."  "  For  he  that  is  not 
against  us  is  on  our  part." 

If  these  texts  comprehended  all  that  the  New^  Testa- 
ment has  to  say  upon  the  subject.  Episcopalians  w^ould 
have  decidedly  the  worst  of  the  argument ;  but  in  reality 
they  represent  only  one  side  Of  the  truth:  the  other  is 
expressed  in  such  passages  as  these:  "Thou  art  Peter, 
and  upon  this  Rock  I  will  build  My  Church;  and  the  gates 
of  Hell  shall  not  prevail  against  it.  And  I  will  give 
unto  thee  the  keys  of  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven:  and  what- 
soever thou  shalt  bind  on  earth  shall  be  bound  in 
Heaven:  and  whatsoever  thou  shalt  loose  on  earth 
shall  be  loosed  in  Heaven."  "  Tell  it  unto  the  Church : 
but  if  he  neglect  to  hear  the  Church,  let  him  be  unto 
thee  as  an  heathen  man  and  a  publican.    Yerily  I  say 


C.  A.— 11 


mm..  CilSlllOVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

unto  you,  Whatsoever  ye  shall  bind  on  earth  shall  be 
bound  in  Heaven:  and  whatsoever  ye  shall  loose  on 
earth  shall  be  loosed  in  Heaven."  "  Then  said  Jesus  to 
them  again,  Peace  be  unto  you,  as  My  Father  hath 
sent  Me,  even  so  send  I  you.  And  when  He  had  said 
this,  He  breathed  on  them,  and  saith  unto  them,  Re- 
l^iveyethe  Holy  Ghost:  whosesoever  sins  ye  remit.they 
are  remitted  unto  them  ;  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain 
they  are  retained.'^  "All  power  is  given  unto  Me  in 
Heaven  and  in  earth.  Go  ye  therefore,  and  teach  all 
nations,  baptizing  them  in  the  name  of  the  Father,  and 
of  the  Son,  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost;  teaching  them  to 
observe  all  things  whatsoever  I  have  commanded  you : 
and  lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 

world." 

These  passages,  and  many  others,  including  most  of 
our  Lord's  Parables,  and  all  that  the  Gospels  have  to 
sav  about  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  or  of  God,  and  the 
Epistles  about  "the  Church,''  "the  Body,"  and  "the 
Bride  of  Christ,"  are  inexplicable  upon  the  Denomina- 
tional hypothesis  that  "Christ  did  not  institute  an 
Ecclesiastical  society  into  which  every  follower  of  His 
should  enter."  Romanists  have  made  too  much  of  them ; 
but  are  Den omi nationalists  therefore  justified  in  pass- 
ing them  over  altogether?  Because  they  do  not  teach 
that  the  Pope  is  infallible  and  that  the  Papal  Commu- 
nion  comprehends  the  whole  of  the  One,  Catholic,  and 
Apostolic  Church,  must  we  conclude  that  they  mean 
nothing  at  all,  or  the  oi)posite  of  what  they  plainly 

say  ? 

It  is  impossible  for  Denominationalists  to  explain 

the  texts  upon  which  they  rely  to  prove  that  the  Church 

of  Christ  is  the  unorganized  invisible  society  of  true 

believers,    or   at    most   the   aggregate   of   voluntary 

associations   of   Christians,    in    harmony    with   those 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIULE    CHURCH. 


103 


which  Episcopalians  cite  as  evidence  that  our  Lord 
organized,  or  provided  in  the  Apostles  for  the  or- 
ganization of  a  visible  society  which,  through  the 
Apostolic  Succession,  has  been  perpetuated  to  this* 
day.  But  we  have  the  advantage  of  having  no  diffi- 
culty whatever  in  explaining  their  texts  in  harmony 
with  ours. 

The  texts  quoted  by  Denominationalists  against  Epis- 
copalians may  be  divided  into  two  classes,  those  which 
are  supposed  to  teach  the  invisibility  of  the  Church,  and 
such  as  are  believed  to  support  the  pretension  that 
there  is  no  body  of  Christians  which  can  make  good  an 
exclusive  claim  to  allegiance.  In  order  to  prevent  rep- 
etition, we  shall  confine  ourselves  for  the  present  to 
the  first  group,  reserving  what  we  have  to  say  about 
the  second  for  other  connections.  And  in  the  interest 
of  brevity  we  shall  consider  the  texts  which  have  sub- 
stantially the  same  import  in  pairs. 

"The  kingdom  of  God  is  within  you."  "The  King- 
dom of  God  is  not  meat  and  drink,  but  righteousness 
and  peace  and  joy  in  the  Holy  Ghost."  Denomination- 
alists quote  these  texts  for  the  purpose  of  proving  that 
the  religion  of  Christ  is  subjective  rather  than  objective. 
If  they  can  make  this  appear,  it  follows  as  a  matter  of 
course  that  the  Church  is  essentially  invisible,  for,  if 
Christianity  be  exclusively  a  religion  of  the  heart,  none 
but  God  can  know  who  embraces  it.  Now  no  one  denies 
that  the  Church  of  the  Gospels  has  a  spiritual  side 
to  which  these  texts  and  others  like  them  refer; 
but,  because  we  recognize  this,  are  we  logically  forced 
to  the  conclusion  that  Ecclesiasticism  is  no  part 
of  Evangelical  truth?  Though  man  has  an  invisible 
mind,  he  nevertheless  possesses  a  visible  body.  When 
we  speak  of  the  former  without  reference  to  the  lat- 
ter, it  is  not  concluded  that  the  person  referred  to 


JHHv 


OUB   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DKNOMINATIONALISTS. 


has  only  a  mental  existence.  Every  text  which  relates 
to  the  invisible  principles,  life,  and  fruits,  of  the  Chris- 
tian religion,  can  be  offset  by  at  least  a  dozen  that  refer 
to  a  visible  organization  instituted  by  Christ.  There 
is  an  universally  recognized  canon  of  interpretation 
which  prohibits  the  construing  of  one  passage  of  the 
Scriptures  so  as  to  contradict  another.  Only  in  so  far 
as  this  law  is  ignored,  is  there  any  truth  in  the  popular 
misconception  that  almost  anything  can  be  proved 
from  the  Bible.  Had  this  rule  not  been  disregarded, 
Denominationalists  could  never  have  found  any  Scrip- 
tural ground  upon  which  to  stand.  In  order  to  justify 
sectarianism,  they  invented  the  theory  of  the  invisibil- 
ity of  the  Church.  This  ingenious  conceit  was  rendered 
plausible  by  the  desperate  expedient  of  interpreting 
a  few  texts  so  as  to  make  them  contradictory  to  the 
whole  tenor  of  both  the  Old  and  the  New  Testament. 
Before  their  interpretation  of  the  isolated  passages, 
upon  which  they  rest  their  cause,  can  be  accepted,  every 
book  of  the  Bible  will  have  to  be  rewritten;  and  not 
only  this,  but  eighteen  hundred  years  of  Ecclesiastical 
History  must  be  blotted  out.  It  should  be  remembered, 
too,  that,  the  authorized  translation  of  the  first  ot 
these  texts  is  in  dispute.  Alford  insists  that  it  should 
be  *' among''  instead  of  ''within."  The  weight  of  au- 
thority inclines  to  this  interpretation,  and  with  good 
reason.  It  is  inconceivable  that  our  Lord  in  speaking 
to  the  Pharisees  should  have  said  ''the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven  is  within  you,"  that  is,  in  your  hearts;  for  in  no 
sense  was  this  true  of  them. 

Those  who  hold  that  Christ  did  not  found  a  visible 
Church,  with  which  He  would  have  every  disciple  identi- 
fied, also  quote  these  texts:  "For  in  Christ  Jesus 
neither  circumcision  availeth  anything,  nor  uucircum- 
cision,  but  faith  viJmh  worketh  by  love."    "  Christ  sent 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


165 


me  not  to  baptize,  but  to  preach  the  Gospel."  As  cir- 
cumcision was  a  rite  of  initiation  into  the  Jewish 
Church,  it  is  argued  from  these  texts  that  the  ex- 
ternalism  of  the  Old  Dispensation  has  been  w^holly 
done  aw^ay  in  the  New\  But  upon  this  hypothesis  the 
circumcision  of  our  Lord,  and  His  participation  in  the 
synagogue  and  Temple  w^orship  are  inexplicable,  as  are 
also  the  facts  that  He  appointed  Baptism  as  the  initia- 
tory lite  of  the  Society  which  He  founded,  and  that  the 
Apostles  deemed  it  absolutely  necessary  to  administer 
this  Sacrament  to  all  converts.  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  are  so  plainly  required  in  the  New  Testa- 
ment, that  even  Denominationahsts  almost  universally 
have  felt  called  upon  to  administer  them.  But  so  long 
as  they  maintain  the  invisibility  of  the  Church,  it  would 
seem  that  consistency  requires  that,  like  the  Quakers, 
they  should  renounce  the  use  of  visible  ordinances ;  for 
by  continuing  to  admit  and  retain  members  by  their 
use,  they  witness  against  themselves.  None  of  the  lead- 
ing non-Episcopalian  Denominations  will  accept  an 
unbapbized  person  as  a  member.  This  being  the  case, 
their  representatives  cannot  consistently  quote  these 
texts  against  us. 

With  more  plausibility  Denominationalists  make  the 
following  citations  in  support  of  their  invisibility 
theory  of  the  Church:  "The  Church  of  God  which  He 
purchased  with  His  blood."  "He  is  the  head  of  the 
Body,  the  Church."  There  can  be  no  doubt  that  if  there 
be  any  such  thing  as  an  unrecognizable  Church  com- 
posed exclusively  of  the  sanctified,  it  is  here  referred  to. 
For  surely  the  "  Church  of  God,"  the  "Church  of  Christ" 
includes  at  least  all  who  are  destined  to  be  so  happy  as 
to  attain  Gospel  Salvation.  There  is  no  difference  of 
opinion  between  us  and  Denominationalists  on  this 
point.    Our  contention  is  upon  the  question  whether  or 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMI NATIONALISTS. 


not  *'the  Church/'  **  the  Body, "has  reference  to  a  visible 
organization  containing  both  good  and  bad.  They 
argue,  with  some  show  of  reason,  that  "the  Body"  of 
which  Christ  is  the  head,  is,  and  must  necessarily  be,  "a 
glorious  Church,  not  having  spot,  or  wrinkle,  or  any 
such  thing,  but  that  it  should  be  holy  and  without 
blemish."  But  this  in  all  probability  is  not  the  decla- 
ration of  an  existing  fact.  It  is  more  likely  a  prophecy 
of  what  the  Church  will  be  at  the  consummation  of  all 
things  when  the  tares  shall   be  separated  from  the 

wheat. 

It  is  asserted  that  a  "body  having  corrupt  members 
cannot  have  an  immaculate  Head."    We  reply  thatGod 
was  certainly  the  head  of  the  Jewish  Church  which  had 
many  unrighteous  members;  in  fact  all  who  belonged 
to  it  were  more  or  less  so.     "Everybody  allows,"  says 
Mr.  Hammond,  "that  the  ancient  Jewish  Church,  the 
Church  before  Christ,  was  a  visible  Church,  and  God's 
Church— God's  Church  and  people,  in  spite  of  its  many 
corruptions— and  one  Church  and  one  body,  the  com- 
munion of  the  circumcised :  every  one  knows  how  de- 
praved, how  rotten,  even  that  was,  and  yet  every  man 
who  knows  his  Bible  also  knows  that  it  was  not  lawful 
for  any  man  to  leave  it  and  found  another."  The  Psalm- 
ist declares  there  is  "none  holy,  no,  not  one."    As  in 
the  Old  Dispensation,  all  failed  in  their  efforts  to  keep 
the  law,  so  in  the  New  all  have  fallen  short  of  their  high 
calling  in  Chiist  Jesus.    Thus  if  our  Lord  be  the  Head  of 
any  Church,  it  must  be  of  a  body  in  which  not  only 
some,  but  all  its  members  are  more  or  less  imperfect.    If 
credence  is  given  to  their  own  testimony,  it  will  be  ad- 
mitted that  the  most  eminent  Saints  in  all  ages  have 
been  far  from  perfect.  And  if,  as  Denominationalists  con- 
tend "the  Church  is  composed  not  of  the  christened, but 
of  the  Christlike,"  then  there  is  not,  never  has  been,  and 


CHRIST    FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


167 


I 


probably  never  will  be,  a  Scriptural  Church  on  earth. 
Even  the  Apostles  St.  Peter,  St.  Paul  and  St.  Barnabas 
would  not  have  been  eligible  for  membership  in  such  a 
Church.    If  Churches  consist  of  the  "Christlike"  only, 
most  of  them  will  be  reduced  to  "  me  and  the  meenister  " 
with  grave  doubts  as  to  the  niiiiister!     "Let  us  sup- 
pose," says  William  Law  in  his  letters  to  the  Bishop  of 
Bangor,  "that  the  Church  of  Christ  was  this  invisible 
number  of  people  united  to  Christ  by  such  internal  in- 
visible graces.    Is  it  possible  that  a  kingdom,  consisting 
of  this  one  particular  sort  of  people  invisibly  good, 
should  be  like  a  net  that  gathers  of  every  kind  of  fish? 
If  it  were  to  be  compared  to  a  net,  it  ought  to  be  com- 
pared to  such  a  net  as  gathersoiily  of  one  kind,  namely, 
good  fish,  and  then  it  might  represent  to  us  a  Church 
that  has  but  one  sort  of  members.  If  anyone  should 
tell  us  that  we  are  to  believe  invisible  Scriptures  and 
observe  invisible  Sacraments,  he  would  have  just  as 
much  reason  and  Scripture  on  his  side  as  your  Lord- 
ship has  for  this  doctrine.    And  it  would  be  of  the  same 
service  to  the  world  to  talk  of  these  invisibilities  if  the 
canon  of  Scripture  were  in  dispute,  as  to  describe  this 
invisible  Church,  when  the  case  is  with  what  visible 
Church  we  ought  to  unite." 

That  the  texts  do  not  support  the  Denominational 
theory  of  invisibility  is  further  evident  from  the  fact 
that  one  of  them,  as  we  see  from  the  context,  refers  to 
a  Church  having  "Elders,"  whom  St.  Paul  exhorts  "to 
feed  the  Church  of  God."  Now,  these  Ephesian  Elders 
and  the  Christians  whom  they  were  charged  to  shep- 
herd were  visible.  It  is  impossible  otherwise  to  think  of 
them.  In  the  other  text  the  Church  is  spoken  of  as 
"the  Body  of  Christ."  An  invisible  body  is  also  un- 
thinkable. It  is  of  the  essence  of  a  body  to  be  recogniz- 
able. The  Denominationalists,  themselves,  do  not  think 


i 


168        mn  OONTEOVERST   WITH    DENOMIN ATI0KALI8TS. 

of  something  invisible  when  they  speak  of  the  Congre- 
gational, Presbyterian,  Baptist  and  Methodist  bodies. 
These  are  all  visible  societies. 

There  still  remains  the  strongest  text  quoted  by 
Denominationalists  to  prove  their  theory.  ''We  are 
come,"  says  the  writer  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews, 
*'to  the  Church  of  the  first  born  who  are  enrolled  in 
Heaven.''  At  first  sight  it  would  seem  as  if  they  must 
be  right  in  maintaining  that  such  words  cannot  possi- 
bly have  reference  to  a  Church  composed  of  both  good 
and  bad.  The  difficulty  arises  from  the  mistaken  idea 
that  the  names  of  none  can  be  written  in  the  Book  of 
Life,  except  of  those  who  are  in  the  state  of  salvation, 
and  destined  to  remain  so  to  their  life's  end.  It  is 
strange  that  those  who  have  so  much  to  say  about 
''conversion/'  and  "backsliding,"  should  lose  sight  of 
the  fact  that  a  name  once  registered  in  Heaven  may  be 
blotted  out.  If  there  be  such  a  thing  as  falling  from 
grace,  no  reason  can  be  assigned  why  the  word  Church 
in  this  passage  should  mean  something  different  from 
what  it  does  everywhere  else  in  Holy  Scripture. 


If,  110^^  we  turn  for  a  few  minutes  to  history,  we 
shall  see  even  more  clearly  than  we  have  seen  from  our 
necessarily  incomplete  examination  of  the  Scriptures, 
that  the  society  instituted  by  Christ  is  a  visible  organ- 
ization. 

The  Sacrament  of  Baptism,  as  we  already  have  had 
occasion  to  observe,  conclusively  shows  this  to  be  the 
case;  it  has  been  administered  from  the  beginning  al- 
most universally.  Though  there  has  been  some  differ- 
ence of  opinion,  especially  since  the  Reformation,  as  to 
the  benefits  annexed  to  this  ordinance,  all  agree  that  it 
formally  admits  the  recipient  to  the  society  of  believers. 


CHRIST   FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


169 


I 


Now,  a  society  which  makes  provision  by  the  adminis- 
tration of  a  visible  Sacrament,  for  the  reception  into 
membership  of  visible  men  and  women,  is  certainly  a 
visible  organization. 

The  legislation  of  this  society  as  manifestly  proves  it 
to  have  been  highly  organized.  The  pages  of  Ecclesias- 
tical History  from  the  beginning  to  the  end  are  largely 
occupied  with  the  accounts  of  the  Councils,  Synods  and 
Convocations  which  have  borne  essentially  the  same 
relation  to  the  society  founded  by  Christ  as  Senates, 
Parliaments  and  Legislatures  bear  to  the  various  civil 
commonwealths  of  the  world.  These  Legislative  As- 
semblies of  the  Church,  the  first  of  which  met  at  Jeru- 
salem in  Apostolic  times,  settled  disputes;  decided  which 
books  were  Divinely  inspired  and  should,  therefore, 
be  regarded  as  a  part  of  the  Bible;  formulated  the  Faith 
once  delivered  to  the  Saints;  and  passed  a  great  body  of 
laws  or  canons  for  the  regulation  of  the  Church.  The 
Councils  and  their  acts  prove  beyond  peradventure  that 
the  society  founded  by  Christ,  was  a  visible  organiza- 
tion, just  as  much  so  as  is  the  United  States,  or  any 
other  nation. 

The  persecutions  which  the  Church  suffered  during 
the  first  four  or  five  centuries  prove  the  same.  It  was 
the  uniform  policy  of  the  civil  authorities  to  smite  the 
Christian  Shepherds  that  the  sheep  might  be  scattered. 
An  unorganized  society  would  have  had  no  rulers  that 
could  have  been  singled  out  from  the  rest  to  suffer  the 
terrible  vengeance  of  the  law,  and  obviously  an  invisible 
society  could  not  have  been  persecuted  at  all. 

The  fact  that  the  Church  has  in  all  ages  excommuni- 
cated those  who  have  been  guilty  of  great  offenses,  also 
proves  that  she  is  a  visible  organization.  That  part  of 
St.  Paul's  second  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians  in  which  he 
gives  directions  concerning  the  course  to  be  pursued  in 


li 


170         OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

the  case  of  a  notorious  evil  liver,  and  the  excommuni- 
cation of  Arius  and  other  notable  heresiarchs  by  the 
Councils,  are  inexplicable  upon  the  Denominational 
hypothesis  of  an  invisible  Church. 

"  But  perhaps  the  strongest  historical  argument  in 
favor  of  that  view  of  Christ^s  mission  for  which  we  con- 
tend, namely,  that  in  addition  to  the  teaching  of  a  new 
philosophy  of  life  and  illustrating  it  in  a  career  of  self- 
sacrifice  which  ended  in  the  atoning  death  on  the  cross, 
He  organized  a  new  Kingdom,  is  found  in  the  simple  fact 
that  befoi-e  the  Reformation  the  Denominational  idea 
never  obtained.  For  fifteen  hundred  years  it  was  uni- 
versally believed  that  Christ  had  made  provision  for  the 
preservation  of  the  new  wine  of  the  Gospel  by  the  crea- 
tion for  it  of  a  new  recei)tacle,  the  Church.  The  notion 
that  the  hearts  of  true  believers  were  to  be  the  only 
receptacle,  never  occurred  to  any  one,  and  a  suggestion 
to  this  effect  would  have  been  ridiculed  as  preposterous. 
How  this  could  have  been  the  case,  if  the  theory  of  an 
unorganized  invisible  Church  be  correct,  has  never  been 
satisfactorily   explained.  .  ,. 

Inclosing  our  argument  in  favor  of  the  Episcopahan 
conception  of  the  Church,  we  may  venture  to  call  atten- 
tion to  the  inconsistency  of  the  great  majority  of  those 
who  would  persuade  us  that  the  society  instituted  by 
Christ  was  not  a  visible  organization.  Methodists, 
Presbvterians,  Baptists,  Congregationalists  and  many 
other  ^bodies  of  Christians  have  made  for  themselves 
more  or  less  elaborate  organizations,  and  are  leaving 
no  stone  unturned  which  will  contribute  to  their  up- 
building. By  doing  so  they  virtually  profess  to  be  wiser 
than  Christ;'  for,  according  to  their  representation, He 
had  not  like  them  the  wisdom  to  perceive  the  necessity 
for  a  corporate  Christianity.  They  contend  that  the 
Christian  religion  without  organization  could  not,  uu- 


CHRIST   FOUNDED    A    VISIBLE    CHURCH. 


171 


der  present  conditions,  make  progress  against  opposing 
influences  in  the  conquest  of  the  w^orld  for  Christ.  In 
this  they  are  unquestionably  right.  There  can  be  no 
doubt  that  if  the  various  organizations  of  Christians 
were  to  disband,  the  cause  of  Christ  would  rapidly  wane 
until  Satan  could  boast  of  a  complete  triumph.  But 
w  ere  the  conditions  of  the  first  centuries  more  favorable 
to  Christianity  than  they  have  been  for  the  past  two 
or  three  hundred  years,  within  which  it  has  been  found 
necessary  to  organize  several  hundred  Christian  socie- 
ties? No.  On  the  contrary,  the  Gospel  in  our  day 
would  stand  a  thousand  chances  to  one  in  our  Lord's 
time  of  making  its  way  without  the  assistance  of  an 
organization.  The  greatest  obstacle  now  to  be  over- 
come is  a  languid  indifference ;  then  the  w  ay  had  to  be 
fought  through  a  solid  phalanx  of  the  most  powerful 
and  persistent  opposition.  It  would  be  a  marvel  be- 
yond all  comprehension,  if  the  Divine  Founder  of  our 
Holy  Religion  who  knew  that  He  would  be  nailed  to  the 
cross  and  that  His  Apostles  and  their  successors  for  a 
long  time  w^ould  nearly  all  suffer  martyrdom,  had  been 
so  devoid  of  foresight  as  to  quit  the  world  without 
leaving  an  organization  which  w  ould  be  compact  and 
vigorous  enough  to  live  and  grow  in  spite  of  all  the 
organized  forces  which  heathendom,  through  the 
representatives  of  the  Roman  Empire,  could  muster 
against  it. 

St.  Augustine,  one  of  the  greatest  theologians  that 
the  Church  has  produced,  must,  therefore,  have  been 
right  w^hen,  as  an  able  summariser  points  out,  he  taught 
that  *^The  Kingdom  of  God  was  not  a  mere  hope,  but  a 
present  reality ;  not  a  mere  name  for  a  Divine  idea,  but 
an  institution,  duly  organized  among  men,  subsisting 
from  one  generation  to  another ;  closely  inter-connected 
with  earthly  rule,  with  definite  guidance  to  give,  and  a 


I    ) 


172      OUR  co:ntroversy  with  denominationalists, 

definite  part  to  take  in  all  the  affairs  of  actual  life.  To 
him  the  Kingdom  of  God  was  an  actual  Polity,  just  as 
the  Roman  Empire  was  a  Polity,  too.  It  was  '  visible ' 
in  just  the  same  way  as  the  earthly  state,  for  it  was  a 
real  institution  with  definite  organization,  with  a  recog- 
nized constitution,  with  a  code  of  laws  and  means  of 
enforcing  them,  with  property  for  its  use,  and  officers 
to  direct  it." 


II. 

PERPETUATED  BY  SUCCESSORS  OF  THE  APOSTLES, 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF   THE    APOSTLES. 


173 


T 


HAT  our  Lord  intended  His  Church  or  Kingdom 
to  continue  through  the  ages  is  antecedently 
probable,  because  the  conditions  which  made  the 
founding  of  it  necessary,  would  require  its  continuation. 
This  generation  of  sinful  men  and  women  need  the  re- 
generating influence  of  the  Church  quite  as  much  as 
that  which  witnessed  its  founding.  To  argue  otherwise 
would  be  to  accuse  of  partiality  Him  who  was  no  re- 
specter of  persons. 

Again  it  may  be  inferred,  if  not  positively  concluded, 
from  Holy  Scripture  that  the  Church  was  designed  to 
continue  through  all  generations.  The  numerous 
prophecies  of  the  Old  Testament  in  which  the  mission  of 
the  Messiah  is  represented  to  be  that  of  founding  an 
everlasting  Kingdom  and  universal  Dominion  certainly 
favor  this  conclusion.  When  our  Lord  said  **upon  this 
rock,"  the  confession  of  faith  in  His  Divinity,  **I  will 
build  My  Church  and  the  gates  of  Hell  shall  not  prevail 
against  it;"  when  He  commissioned  His  Apostles  to 
"Go  and  teach  all  nations,  baptizing  them  in  the 
name  of  the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy 
Ghost;  teaching  them  to  observe  all  things  whatsoever 


I  have  commanded;"  and  when  He  gave  them  this 
promise  for  their  encouragement,  **Lo!  I  am  with  you 
alway  even  unto  the  end  of  the  world,"  it  is  as  if  he  had 
proclaimed  the  perpetuity  of  the  Church  in  almost  so 
many  words.  Certainly  nothing  else  can  be  inferred 
from  these  texts. 

Furthermore,  if  the  Church  were  to  continue,  since  it 
could  only  do  so  through  a  succession  of  officers,  it  is 
antecedently  probable  that  the  Apostolic  College,  which 
after  the  Ascension,  was  the  visible  head  of  the  Church, 
would  not  be  allowed  to  die  out  with  the  twelve.  All 
other  organizations  that  the  world  has  ever  known, 
have  made  provision  for  a  succession  of  .their  chief  offi- 
cers, and  there  is  no  reason  to  suppose  that  it  was  to 
be  otherwise  with  the  Church  of  Christ.  The  promise, 
^*  Lo,  I  am  with  you  alway,  even  unto  the  end  of  the 
world,"  besides  proving  that  the  Church  is  to  endure 
through  all  the  ages,  proves  the  same  of  the  Apostolic 
office.  The  College  of  Apostles  was  constituted  a 
moral,  corporate  personality,  which  was  to  continue  to 
the  end  of  the  world.  Its  identity  is  no  more  diminished 
by  the  perpetual  succession  of  its  members,  than  our 
individuality  is  affected  by  the  constant  change  of  the 
elements  that  compose  our  bodies. 

The  fact  that  the  Apostolate  was  not  limited  to  the 
original  twelve,  justifies  the  inference  that  this  office 
was  to  be  perpetuated  in  an  uninterrupted  succession. 
Matthias  was  elected  to  take  the  place  of  Judas.  The 
Church  of  Antioch,  acting  under  express  direction  of 
the  Holy  Ghost,  set  apart,  by  the  imposition  of  hands, 
St.  Paul  and  St.  Barnabas  to  be  Apostles.  James,  the 
Lord's  brother,  evidently  was  consecrated  by  the  Apos- 
tolic College  the  first  Apostle  or  Bishop  of  Jerusalem. 
Timothy  and  Titus  were  made  Apostles,  respectively,  of 
Ephesus  and  Crete.    St.  Jerome,  one  distinguished  even 


If 


174         OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIOXALISTS. 

among  Saints,  himself  only  a  Presbyter,  writes:  "Im- 
mediately after  the  passion  of  the  Lord,  James  was  or- 
dained by  the  Apostles  Bishop  of  Jerusalem.''  "That 
Timothy  was  a  Bishop,''  says  Bishop  Bull,  "  and  Bishop 
of  Ephesus,  the  metropolis,  or  chief  city  of  Asia,  is  so 
fully  attested  by  all  antiquity,  that  he  must  be  either 
very  ignorant  or  very  shameless  that  shall  deny  it,  es- 
pecially there  being  besides  very  plain  evidence  of  the 
Episcopal  power  and  authority,  wherewith  he  was  in- 
vested,  in  this  very  Epistle  of  St.  Paul  written  to  him." 
St.  Jerome  calls  Titus  "  Bishop  of  Crete ; "  St.  Ambrose 
says,  "The  Apostle  Consecrated  Titus  Bishop ;"  Theo- 
doret,  that  he  was  "the  Bishop  of  the  Cretans;"  and 
so  the  whole  band  of  witnesses. 

When,  in  addition  to  what  might  naturally  be  in- 
ferred, we  take  into  account  the  fact  that  in  all  ages  and 
every  part  of  the  world  there  have  been  men  claiming  to 
be,  and  universally  recognized  as,  successors  to  the  Apos- 
tles, the  conclusion  that  the  inference  respecting  the  per- 
petuation of  the  Church  through  Bishops  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Succession  is  correct,  can  hardly  be  resisted.  As 
Mr.  Haddan  points  out,  "in  one  sense  Apostolic  Suc- 
cession requires  a  complicated  proof;  in  another  it  is  a 
palpable  fact— as  nmch  a  matter  of  moral  certainty  as 
is  the  actual  appointment,  by  the  rightful  authority, 
of  ministers  of  the  state.  No  one  doubts  the  fact  of 
the  Ordination  of  the  Clergy  or  Bishops  now  offici- 
ating, although,  among  some  myriads,  there  may  oc- 
casionally have  been  an  impostor.  Yet  this  assurance  is 
not  founded  on  personal  inspection  of  legal  evidence.  It 
rests  upon  the  overwhelming  presumption  that  the  fact 
would  not  be  as  it  is,  unless  the  legal  evidence  were  be- 
hind it ;  and  this  presumption  extends  back  to  the  be- 
ginning as  regards  the  Church."  "It  is,"  as  Bishop 
Hugh   Miller   Thompson   says,  "merely   trifling  with 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF    THE    APOSTLES.         175 

words  if  a  man  knows,  and  evidence  of  incompetency 
to  express  an  opinion  if  he  does  not  know,  to  say, 
*you  cannot  prove  that,  from  any  modern  Bishop  up 
to  the  Apostles,  there  is  a  continuous  succession  of 
Ordainers:'  You  might  as  well  tell  me  I  cannot  prove 
that  the  oak  tree  on  the  lawn  has  an  unbroken  de- 
scent from  some  oak  of  two  thousand  years  ago!  I 
do  not  need  to  prove  a  self-evident  fact  in  nature, 
or  a  self-evident  fact  in  organic  society.  The  oak  of 
to-day  proves  the  oak  of  twenty  centuries  ago.  The 
Bishop  of  to-day  proves  the  Bishop  of  eighteen  cen- 
turies ago.  They  knew  oaks  then  from  bramble  bushes 
as  well  as  we  do.  They  knew  Bishops  just  as  well  as 
we  do,  perhaps  better,  and  they  knew,  too,  that  Bish- 
ops came  from  Bishops  as  oaks  come  from  oaks.  There 
is  no  other  way  known  to  man  to  get  either  oaks  or 
Bishops.  The  ground  has  been  gone  over  so  many 
times,  and  so  carefully  and  exhaustively,  and  by  such 
thorough  scholarship,  that  one  may  rest  in  peace." 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that,  if  the  Apostolic  office 
were  continued  in  the  Church,  it  would  be  the  center  of 
unity  and  the  fountain  of  ministerial  authority ;  hence 
we  are  right  in  saying  that  the  Cliurch  itself  was  perpet- 
uated through  the  Apostles  and  their  successors.  They 
were  the  representativ^es  of  Christ,  and  after  His  Ascen- 
sion, the  visible  head  of  the  Church.  Before  He  returned 
to  the  right  hand  of  the  Father  to  make  intercession  for 
us  he  gave  them  all  power  and  said:  "As  my  Father 
hath  sent  me  even  so  send  I  you."  Nothing,  therefore, 
could  be  more  certain  than  that  the  Apostles  and  their 
successors  were  appointed  by  Christ  Himself  to  be  His 
representatives.  As  before  the  Ascension  there  would 
have  been  no  Church  without  Christ  as  its  head,  so 
since  then,  there  can  be  no  true  Christian  Church  with- 
out the  representative  headship  of  the  Apostolate. 


176  OUR  CONTROVERSY  WITH  DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

We  are  aware  that  these  inferences  will  seem  new  and 
strange  to  many,  but  we  submit  to  the  candid  reader 
that  they  are  naturally  drawn  from  the  texts  which 
have  passed  under  review.  And  we  are  all  the  more 
confident  as  to  the  correctness  of  our  conclusions,  be- 
cause of  the  fact  that  they  are  in  accord  with  the  repre- 
sentations that  were  made  by  the  early  Fathers  and  the 
great  Doctors  of  the  Church.  Let  us  see  what  some  of 
them  have  to  say  about  (1)  the  perpetuation  of  the 
Apostolic  office  in  the  Episcopate,  and  (2)  the  necessity 
of  Bishops  to  the  existence  of  the  Church. 

1.  What  then  do  the  ancients  say  concerning  the  per- 
petuation of  the  Apostolic  office  through  the  Historic 
Episcopate? 

St.  Clement  of  Rome,  a.d.  95,  says  that  "desiring  to 
avoid  controversy  which  they  foresaw,  the  Apostles 
ordained  certain  men  to  the  end  that,  when  they  should 
have  fallen  asleep  in  death,  others  of  approved  charac- 
ter might  succeed  to  their  special  office."  Such  were 
Timothy  and  Titus. 

Irena^us,  a.  d.  180:  ''We  must  obey  those  who  are 
the  Elders  in  the  Church,  those  who,  as  we  have  shown, 
have  the  succession  from  the  Apostles ;  who,  with  the 
succession  of  the  Episcopate,  have  received  also  the 
sure  gift  of  truth,  according  to  the  will  of  the  Father ; 
but  as  for  the  rest,  who  leave  the  original  succession, 
and  come  together  wherever  it  may  be,  them  we  must 
hold  in  suspicion,  whether  as  heretics  of  a  wrong  opin- 
ion, or  as  men  who  make  division  through  pride  and 
self-pleasing,  or  again,  as  hypocrites."    ''All  who  wish  to 
see  the  truth,  have  it  in  their  power  to  fix  their  eyes  on 
the  tradition  of  the  Apostles,  which  is  manifested  in  all 
the  world ;  and  we  can  recount  the  number  of  those, 
who  were  appointed  by  the  Apostles  as  Bishops  in  the 
Churches,  and  their  successors  down  to  our  own  time, 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS   OF   THE    APOSTLES.        177 

who  neither  taught  nor  had  any  knowledge  of  the  wild 
notions  of  these  men.  For  had  the  Apostles  known  any 
mysteries  which  they  taught  to  the  perfect  in  private, 
and  unknown  to  the  rest,  they  would  have  delivered 
them  to  those  surely  before  all  others,  to  whom  they  in- 
trusted the  very  Churches  themselves.  For  they  desired 
them  to  be  eminently  perfect  and  utterly  without  re- 
proach, whom  they  left  behind  as  their  actual  successors, 
handing  on  to  them  their  own  position  of  presidency." 

Tertullian,  a.  d.,  200,  adopts  Irenseus'  line  of  argu- 
ment and  enlarges  upon  it  in  dealing  with  Gnostic 
heretics.  He  asks  them  a  double  question :  First,  do 
they  hold  the  rule  of  Faith?  Second,  have  they  an 
Apostolic  Succession?  "Let  them  produce  the  ac- 
count of  the  origins  of  their  Churches;  let  them  unroll 
the  line  of  their  Bishops,  running  down  in  such  a  way 
from  the  beginning  that  their  first  Bishop  shall  have 
had  for  his  authorizer  and  predecessor  one  of  the  Apos- 
tles, or  of  the  Apostolic  men  who  continued  to  the  end 
in  their  fellowship.  This  is  the  way  in  which  the  Apos- 
tolic Churches  hand  on  their  registers.  As  the  Church  of 
the  Smyrnaeans  relates  that  Polycarp  was  installed  by 
John,  as  the  Church  of  the  Romans  relates  that  Clement 
was  ordained  by  Peter,  so,  in  like  manner,  the  rest  of 
the  Churches  exhibit  the  names  of  men  appointed  to  the 
Episeopate  by  Apostles,  whom  they  possess  as  trans- 
mitters of  the  Apostolic  seed."  "  So,  now,  you  who  wish 
to  exercise  your  curiosity  to  better  profit  in  the  matter 
of  your  salvation,  run  through  the  ApostoHc  Churches, 
where  the  very  chairs  of  the  Apostles  still  i)reside  in  their 
own  places  — Corinth,  Philippi,  Thessalonica,  Ephesus, 
Rome.  Make  it  your  business  to  inquire  what  they 
have  learnt  and  taught  I " 

Nor  had  the  Fathers  any  other  thought  of  Bishops 
but  as  successors  in  the  very  Office  and  Order  of  the 


C.A.— 12 


I 


118         #UK   COHTROVERSY    WIT»   BENOMIH ATIONALISTS. 

Apostles.  **lreii8Bns/*  observes  a  learned  commentator, 
"regards  the  Bishops  in  every  Church  as  succeed- 
ing in  an  especial  sense  to  the  Apostles.  They  rep- 
resent in  every  place  by  Apostolic  Succession  the 
Catholic  Faith ;  they  have  the  '  gift  of  the  truth '  and 
the  Apostolic  authority  of  government;  they  are  the 
guardians  also  no  doubt  of  the  grace  by  which  Chris- 
tians live,  of  which  as  much  as  of  the  truth  the  Church 
Is  the  'rich  treasury."'  And  St.  Jerome,  a.  d.  390, 
commenting  on  that  saying  of  St.  Paul,  "Other  Apos- 
tles saw  I  none  save  James  the  Lord's  brother,"  says : 
"  For  by  degrees,  as  time  went  on,  others  were  ordained 
Apostles  by  those  whom  the  Lord  had  chosen,  as  that 
passage  to  the  Philippians  proves,  saying:  *I  supposed 
It  necessary  to  send  to  you  Epaphroditus,  your  Apos- 
tle.'" ''The  Bishops,"  observes  Pacian,  "are  called 
Apostles,  as  Paul  declareth  in  speaking  of  Epaphro- 
ditus." 

'  So  that  as  has  been  well  said,  "if  the  words  of  Holy 
Scripture  be  not  altogether  unmeaning  and  unsubstan- 
tial, if  the  Church  of  the  Apostles  be  anything  more 
than  a  phantom  or  a  vision,  if  its  first  rulers,  St.  James 
and  St.  John,  Clement  and  Epaphroditus,  Ignatius  and 
Polycarp,  were  really  what  they  seem  to  have  been, 
what  they  claimed  to  be,  and  what  they  were  admitted 
to  be,  then  is  it  most  certain  that  they,  and  all  their 
successors  after  them,  were,  as  universal  Christen- 
dom believed,  Bishops  or  Apostles  in  the  Church  of 
God." 

As  the  author  makes  no  claim  to  being  a  Patristic 
scholar  or  an  historical  authority,  a  few  quotations 
from  the  writings  of  those  who  have  been  preeminently 
such  will  greatly  strengthen  his  position,  and  so  carry 
conviction  to  the  reader.  Hooker :  "  Let  us  not  fear  to 
be  lier^in  bold  and  |)eremptory,  that,  if  anything  in  the 


■>.;. 


f 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF   THE    APOSTLES.        179 

Church's  government,  surely  the  first  institution  of 
Bishops  was  from  Heaven,  was  even  of  God :  the  Holy 
Ghost  was  the  author  of  it."  Bishop  Bilson  :  "  Of  this 
[the  Apostolical  Succession]  there  is  so  perfect  record,  in 
all  the  stories  and  Fathers  of  the  Church,  that  I  must  muse 
with  what  face  men  that  have  any  taste  of  learning,  can 
denie  the  vocation  of  Bishops  came  from  the  Apostles; 
for  that  they  succeeded  the  Apostles  and  Evangelists  in 
their  Churches  and  chaires  may  inevitably  be  proved, 
if  any  Christian  persons  or  Churches  deserve  to  be 
credited."  Bishop  Sanderson:  "The  Bishops  are  the 
lawful  successors  of  the  Apostles  and  inheritors  of  their 
power."  Archbishop  BramhaM :  "  The  line  of  Apostolic 
Succession  is  the  very  nerves  and  sinews  of  Ecclesiastical 
unity  and  communion  both  with  the  present  Church, 
and  with  the  Cathohc  symbolical  Church  of  all  suc- 
cessive ages."  Bishop  Taylor:  " Episcopacy  relies  not 
upon  the  authority  of  the  Fathers  and  Councils,  but 
upon  Scripture,  upon  the  institution  of  Christ,  or  the 
institution  of  the  Apostles,  upon  an  universal  tradition 
and  an  universal  practice,  not  upon  the  words  and 
opinions  of  the  Doctors ;  and  it  hath  as  great  a  testi- 
mony as  Scripture  itself  hath."  Archbishop  Laud: 
"This  I  will  say,  and  abide  by  it,  that  the  calling  of 
Bishops  injure  diviDO,hy  Divine  right."  Canon  Liddon: 
"When  w^e  say  that  Bishops  are  successors  of  the 
Apostles  we  are  not  formulating  a  theory,  but  stating 
a  fact  of  history."  Bishop  Moberly :  "  The  historical 
fact  of  an  Episcopal  Succession,  tracing  back  to  the 
Apostles  themselves,  is  undeniably  established."  And 
even  John  Calvin  in  writing  to  a  friend  who  had  recently 
been  consecrated  to  the  Episcopate,  felt  constrained  to 
acknowledge:  "Thou  hast  been  appointed  a  Bishop; 
with  thee  is  present  the  authority  of  the  Apostle 
Paul." 


; 


■ 


I; 


180         OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMI NATIONALISTS. 

Presbyterians,  Lutherans,  Methodists  and  some 
other  bodies  of  Christians  who  are  without  the  Historic 
Episcopate,  claim  that  if  there  be  any  ministerial  suc- 
cession coming  down  to  us  from  New  Testament  times, 
it  is  through  the  order  of  Presbyters  or  elders,  not  that 
• of  the  Apostles.  They  affirm  that,  after  the  death  of  St. 
John,  the  Church  was  governed  by  colleges  of  the  Pres- 
bytery of  which,  when  Christianity  had  been  well  estab- 
lished, there  was  one  in  every  large  city.  These  had 
jurisdiction  over  adjacent  villages  and  the  surrounding 
country.  Each  of  them  had  a  Moderator  or  President 
who  was  elected  from  year  to  year.  In  the  course  of 
time  reflections  became  almost  the  universal  rule.  As 
the  Moderator-Presbyters  were  usually  men  of  great 
force  and  influence  and  withal  men  of  ambition,  they 
soon,  either  by  common  consent  or  usurpation,  set 
aside  their  brother  Presbyters  and  assumed  the  author- 
ity and  prerogatives  of  the  Apostolate  under  the  title  of 
Bishops. 

In  proof  of  all  this  they  urge  the  probability  that 
there  was  an  early  period  of  the  Church's  life  when 
"Bishop''  and  ** Presbyter"  were  convertible  terms. 
And,  it  is,  indeed,  a  curious  and  admitted  fact  that 
there  is  no  special  name  absolutely  restricted  to  the 
highest  Order,  on  which  all  others  depend,  in  the  New 
Testament.  "But,"  as  Mr.  Eagar  observes,  ** whatso- 
ever may  be  the  explanation,  the  Order  of  the  Episco- 
pate shares  this  namelessness  with  even  greater  things. 
The  second  Sacrament  has  no  absolutely  distinctive 
Scriptural  name;  it  may  be  referred  to  once  as  'the 
Lord's  Supper;'  it  is  called  'Euchari8tia,'but  that  word 
is  employed  also  in  other  meanings;  our  common  name 
of  *Holy  Communion'  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Bible. 
The  Doctrine  of  the  Incarnation  has  to  go  outside 
Scripture  for  a  name  in  which  to  sum  up  the  revealed 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF   THE    APOSTLES.        181 

truths,  and  we  have  to  employ  a  word  not  found  in 
Scripture  whenever  we  speak  of  the  Everlasting  (rod  as 
*the  Trinity.'  In  all  these  matters,  sensible  persons 
have  long  ago  learned  that  names  count  for  very  little 
and  facts  for  a  great  deal ;  the  same  observation  applies 
at  least  as  forcibly  to  the  question  of  the  Episcopate." 
It  is  probable  that  in  the  case  of  some  of  the  Churches 
founded  by  St.  Paul,  the  chief  Elder  had  the  oversight 
of  the  flock  during  the  Apostle's  absence;  but  there  is 
no  evidence  that  such  overseers  or  Bishops  had  the 
power  of  ordaining,  or  that  they  were  anything  more 
than  the  Archpriests,  or  Archdeacons  of  later  days. 
But  the  period  of  this  Presbyterial  overseership,  if  it 
existed  at  all,  was  so  brief  and  confined  to  such  narrow 
limits ;  its  history  was  so  obscure,  and  the  speedy  emer- 
gence of  the  threefold  order  so  universal,  that  nothing 
in  regard  to  the  permanent  constitution  of  the  Church 
can  be  built  upon  the  fact  of  the  identity  for  which  our 
brethren  contend.  A  departure  from  the  universal  rule 
of  centuries  cannot  be  justified  by  a  reference  to  the 
possible  practice  of  one  brief,  transitional  period  of  his- 
tory. If  in  the  Apostolic  age  Presbyters  were  some- 
times called  Bishops,  it  was  only  because  the  highest 
Order  of  Church  governors  to  which  this  title  was  after- 
wards reserved,  were  in  the  earliest  ages  generally  called 
Apostles.  ^*The  Bishops,"  says  St.  Ambrose,  "are 
Apostles;"  and  St.  Cyprian:  **The  Lord  appointed 
Apostles,  that  is.  Bishops;"  and  St.  Jerome,  "Bishops 
occupy  the  place  of  Apostles;"  and  Pacian,  "the  Bish- 
ops are  entitled  Apostles;"  and  Tertullian,  "were first 
ordained  by  the  Apostles;"  and  St.  Irenaeus,  "are 
traced  in  all  Churches  from  the  Apostles;"  and  St. 
Augustine, "  are  instead  of  Apostles ; "  and,  in  one  word, 
all  the  Saints  and  all  Martyrs,  all  Churches,  and  all 
times,  declare  the  same  truth— that  Bishops  are  the 


182 


OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


Apostles  of  the  Most  Higli ;  or  that,  in  the  words  of 
Hooker:  "The  first  Bishops  in  the  Church  of  Christ 
were  His  blessed  Apostles." 

Presbyterians  are  ever  reminding  us,  also,  of  what  St. 
Jerome  says  about  the  Church  at  Alexandria.    It  is,  as 
they  say,  at  least  possible  to  conclude  from  his  account 
that  when  the  Patriarchal  See  fell  vacant,  it  was  filled 
by  the  election  of  a  Presbyter  who,  by  this  act,  without 
Episcopal  Consecration,  became  Bishop.    To  this  we 
reply:   (1)  St.  Jerome  nowhere  actually  says  that  an 
Alexandrian  clergyman  who  had  received  Ordination 
to  the  Presbyterial  office  only,  became  Bishop  simply 
because  of  his  election  to  the  Episcopate  by  brother 
Presbyters.    (2)  Even  if  at  Alexandria  the  election  was 
not  followed  by  Consecration  to  the  Episcopate,  this 
departure  from  the  general  rule  may  be  accounted  for 
upon  the  hypothesis  that  some  of  the  Parochial  Clergy 
had  been  duly  invested  with  the  Episcopal  character  by 
the  laying  on  of  hands.    At  a  later  period  this  is  known 
to  have  been  the  case  at  Rome,  and  it  probably  ac- 
counts for  the  fact  that  in  the  early  British  Church 
there  were  so  many  more  Bishops  than  Dioceses.    Of 
course  these  possible  Bishops  of  Alexandria  could  not- 
legally  exercise  the  functions  of  the  Episcopate  until 
they  had  been  canonically  elected  to  a  vacant  See,  but 
after  such  election  they  could,  without  further  qualifica- 
tion, ascend  the  Episcopal  throne. 

As  the  late  Prebendary  Sadler,  one  of  the  most 
profound  of  modern  Biblical  students,  in  a  tract 
on  Church  government,  says:  "The  idea  of  an 
Apostolically-ordained  Presbyterian,  or  other  such 
system,  following  upon  the  death  of  the  Apostles 
and  existing  for  any  length  of  time,  appears  to  me 
to  be  involved  in  the  greatest  difficulties.  It  seems 
mcredible  that  a  Fresbyterate   appointed    bv  Knox 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF   THE    APOSTLES.        183 

and  Melville,  should  have  lasted  three  hundred  years, 
whilst   a   supposed   corresponding  system,  appointed 
by  St.    Paul  himself,    hopelessly  collapsed   in  half  a 
century."    Elsewhere  he  sums  up  the  case  thus :    "  (1 ) 
We  have  the    Lord    Himself   personally   appointing 
the    Apostles    and    apparently   assuring    them    that 
their  ministry  would  last  till  the  end  of   the  world. 
(2)  We   have   in   the  New  Testament   the  history  of 
the  first  thirty  or  forty  years  of  the  Church,  during 
the  whole  of  which  period  the  one  sole,  supreme  gov- 
ernment is  the  Apostolic,  with  the  exception  of  the 
Church  in  one  city.    (3)  I1iis  exception  is  the  Mother 
Church  of  Christendom,  which,  if  St.  James  be  not  an 
Apostle,   is   under   Episcopal    as   distinguished    from 
Apostolic  rule.    (4)  We  have  the  great  Apostle  of  the 
Gentiles  ruling  the  Churches  committed  to  him   with 
an  hyper-Episcopal  oversight,  keeping  apparently  all 
power  ofevery  sort  in  his  own  hands.    (5)  We  have  the 
Apostle  at  the  close  of  his  career  writing  letters  to  the 
men  tlirough  whose  means  he  had  exercised  his  Episco- 
pal control  over  Churches  in  all  parts  of  the  civilized 
world,  in  order  to  instruct  them  in  the  right  use  of  the 
quasi-Apostolic  powers  he  had  made  over  to   them. 
Then  there  is  a  gap  of  some  seventy  years  at  the  most, 
and  at  the  end  of  this  period  history  presents  us  with 
the  spectacle  of  the  Christian  Church  everywhere  offi- 
cered by  men  possessing  the  Governmental  and  Ordain- 
mg  powers  of  the  Apostolic  delegates,  though,  as  was  to 
be  expected,  with  more  defined  and  localized  spheres  of 
action .    And  yet  apparently  for  the  one  almost  avowed 
purpose  of  interposing  some  break,  and  proving  a  dis- 
connection between  the  Apostolic  and  any  later  minis- 
try, we  are  asked  to  assume  the  existence  of  some  inter- 
mediate  Presbyterian  or  Congregational  system,  of  the 
constitution  of  which  history  has  not  preserved  to  us 


i 


M 


i 


184         OUR    CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

one  fragment,  and  which,  i!  established,  must  have  been 
established  without  any  principles  of  permanency  im- 
pressed upon  it,  so  that,  according  to  the  confession  of 
those  who  conjecture  it,  its  very  memory  had  perished 
out  of  the  mind  of  the  Church  within  a  hundred  years 
after  its  appointment.'' 

The  obscure  but  short  period  between  the  last  of  the 
Apostolic  and  the  firet  of  the  post-Apostolic  writers, 
during  which,  according  to  the  representations  of  De- 
nominationalists,  the  Church  was  governed  by  a  Board 
of  Presbyters,  has  been  compared  to  a  tunnel.  We 
have  good  light  where  we  have  the  books  of  the  New 
Testament  to  guide  us,  and  again  when  we  come  down 
to  the  abundant  literary  remains  of  the  latter  part  of 
the  second  century;  but  there  is  an  intervening  period, 
here  and  there  faintly  illumined  by  a  few  documents 
giving  such  scanty  and  interrupted  light  as  may  be  af- 
forded by  the  air-holes  of  a  tunnel.  If  in  our  study  of 
the  dimly-lighted  portion  of  the  history  we  wish  to  dis- 
tinguish what  is  certain  from  what  is  doubtful,  we  may 
expect  to  find  the  things  certain  in  what  can  be  seen 
from  either  of  the  two  well-lighted  ends.  If  the  same 
thing  is  visible  on  looking  from  either  end,  we  can  have 
no  doubt  of  its  existence.  Beyond  question  the  Church, 
before  entering  the  tunnel,  was  governed  by  Apostles 
and  when  it  came  out,  by  Bishops,  claiming  to  be 
successors  of  the  Apostles. 

We  shall  conclude  this  division  of  our  subject  with  a. 
famous  passage  from  Chillingworth's  crushing  answer 
to  the  rejH-esentations  of  Presbyterians:  "When  1  shall 
see  all  the  fables  in  the  *  Metamorphoses '  acted  and 
proved  true  stories;  when  I  shall  see  all  the  democracies 
and  aristocracies  in  the  world  lie  down  to  sleep,  and 
awake  into  monarchies,  then  I  will  begin  to  believe  that 
Presbyterial    government,    having    continued    in   the 


PERPETUATED    BY    SUCCESSORS    OF    THE    APOSTLES.        185 

Church  during  the  Apostles'  times,  should  presently  after, 
against  the  Apostles'  Doctrine  and  the  will  of  Christ,  be 
wheeled  about  like  a  scene  in  a  mask  and  transformed 
into  Episcopacy.  In  the  meantime,  while  these  things 
are  thus  incredible  and  in  human  reason  impossible,  I 
hope  I  shall  have  leave  to  conclude  thus:  Episcopal 
government  was  universally  received  in  the  Church 
presently  after  the  Apostles'  times.  Between  the  Apos- 
ties  and  this  presently  after,  there  was  not  time  enough 
for,  nor  possibility  of,  so  great  an  alteration;  and, 
therefore,  there  was  not  such  alteration  as  is  pre- 
tended. And,  therefore.  Episcopacy  being  so  ancient 
and  Catholic,  must  be  granted  also  to  be  Apostolic." 


In  reference  to  the  necessity  of  Bishops  to  the  exist- 
ence of  the  Church,  it  may  be  said  that,  since  they  are 
the  successors  of  the  Apostles,  it  follows  as  a  matter  of 
course  that,  as  there  could  have  been  no  Church  in  the 
Apostolic  days  without  the  headship  of  "the  eleven" 
and  those  whom  they  made  partakers  with  themselves 
in  the  Apostolate,  so,  after  their  time,  there  could  be 
none  without  a  Bishop.  We  see  from  the  Acts  that  the 
first  disciples  "continued  steadfastly  in  the  Apostles' 
doctrine  and  fellowship."  This  was,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  a  necessary  condition  of  membership  in  Christ's 
Apostolic  Church.  As  Bishops  of  the  uninterrupted  and 
Canonical  succession  are  nothing  less  than  Apostles,  it 
is,  in  the  nineteenth  century  as  in  the  first,  obligatory 
upon  all  professing  Christians  to  be  in  communion  with 
one  of  them.  At  any  rate  this  view  prevailed  down 
through  the  ages  until  the  Reformation. 

St.  Ignatius,  a.  d.  107,  writes:  "Where  the  Bishop 
appears,  there  let  the  people  be,  as  where  is  Christ  Jesus, 
there  is  the  Catholic   Church."    "The  Bishop  is  the 


OUR   COOTROVERSY   WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

center  of  each  individual  Church,  as  Jesus  Christ  m  the 
center  of  the  universal  Church."    "He  who  does  anv- 
thing  apart  from  the  Bishop,  and  the  Presbytery,  and 
Deacons  is  not  pure  in  his  conscience.''    '^For  as  many 
as  are  of  God  and  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  with  the 
Bishop."  Elsewhere  the  same  Father  says:  "Do  your  dili- 
gence, therefore,  that  ye  be  confirmed  in  the  ordinances 
of  the  Lord  and  of  the  Apostles,  that  ye  may  prosper  in 
all  things  whatsoever  ye  do  in  flesh'^and  spirit  in  the 
Son  and  Father  and  in  the  Spirit,  with  your  revered 
Bishop,  and  with  the  fitly  wreathed  spiritual  circlet  of 
your  Presbytery,  and  with  the  Deacons  who  walk  after 
God.    Be  obedient  to  the  Bishop  and  to  one  another, 
as  Jesus  Christ  was  to  the  Father,  according  to  the  flesh,' 
and  as  the  Apostles  were  to  Christ  and  to  the  Father,' 
that  there  may  be  union  both  of  flesh  and  of  spirit." 

Irenaeus,  a.  d.  180,  gave  laconic  expression  to  the 
conviction  which  universally  prevailed  during  the  first 
fifteen  hundred  years  of  Christianity,  when  he  said :  "  No 
Church  without  a  Bishop." 

The  blessed  Athanasius,  a.  d.  350,  writing  to  one 
who  had  fled  from  the  duties  of  the  Episcopal  oflfice,  for 
fear  of  persecution,  says,  "How  wouldst  thou  have  be- 
come a  Christian,  if  there  had  been  no  Bishops?"  And 
then  he  proceeds  to  assert,  in  the  uniform  language  of 
the  primitive  Saints,  from  the  Martyrs  Ignatius  and 
IrensBus  down  to  Basil  and  Ambrose^  that  the  Church 
is  in  such  sort  built  upon  the  Bishops  — that  is,  the 
Apostles  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ—that  the  one  cannot 
even  be  contemplated  as  distinct,  from  the  other;  a 
Church  without  Bishops  being,  in  the  judgment  of  these 
ancients,  not  "defective,"  or  "imperfect"  merely,  but, 
as  they  speak,  *'  no  Church  at  all." 

Speaking  of  the  necessity  of  Bishops  to  the  existence 
of  the  Church,  the  author  of  "  Notes  on  the  Catholic 


PERPETUATED    BY   SUCCESSORS    OF   THE    APOSTLES.        187 

Episcopate,"  says :  "  So  constant  was  this  belief  among 
all  lands  wheresoever  the  Gospel  had  been  preached, 
that  even  those  misbelievers  who  fled  out  of  the  ark  of 
the  Church,  and  formed  to  themselves  conventicles 
apart,  never  dreamed  of  setting  up  any  purer  or  more 
primitive— nay,  or  any  other— form  of  government 
than  this,  but  perpetuated  their  errors  by  a  succession 
of  Pseudo-Bishops.  And,  when  certain  women,  Med 
away  with  divers  lusts,'  and  seeking  to  annul  even  the 
distinction  between  the  sexes,  ventured  to  usurp  the 
ofl^ce  of  teachers,  and  to  frame  a  new  company  of  be- 
lievers, it  was  by  imitating  the  only  order  which  they 
had  ever  heard  of,  and  appointing  from  their  own  ranks 
Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  that  they  attempted  to 
execute  their  impious  plan." 

So  far  as  Holy  Scripture  is  concerned,  one  passage 
only  has  been  quoted  as  leaving  an  opening  for  other 
than  an  Episcopally  ordained  ministry  in  the  Church 
of  Christ.    ^'  Forbid  him  not,"  said  our  Lord  of  the  man 
who  cast  out  devils  in  His  name,  while  not  following 
the  Apostles.    But  an  injunction  not  to  forbid  work 
does  not  necessarily  imply  its  orderliness,  or  even  legal- 
ity ;  and  what  is  there,  save  a  very  doubtful  analogy, 
to  connect  this  man's  actions  with  the  work  of  the  min- 
istry? We  should  not  be  at  all  willing  to  forbid  the  work 
of,  say,  **The  Young  Men's  Christian  Association,"  or 
to  deny  that  it  is  ''  on  Christ's  part."   But  we  should  be 
greatly  surprised  if  this  were  construed  into  a  recogni- 
tion of  any  claims  that  its  worthy  secretaries  might 
put  forth  to  be  a  branch  of  the  Christian  ministry.'' It 
is  quite  certain,  at  any  rate,  that  neither  in  the  New 
Testament,  nor  in  Church  History,  is  there  any  trace  of 
the  followers  of  this  man,  or  of  any  like  him,  as  a  sep- 
arate body  of  Christians.    So  that  one  of  two  things 
must  have  happened— either  his  work  absolutely  died 


OUR   COIfTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

111%  or  he  found  that  very  work  a  means  of  drawing 
him  into  the  fellowship  of  the  Apostles. 

m. 

THE  APPOINTED  ARK  m^ SALVATION. 

THE  Church  of  Christ  which  has  been  perpetuated 
through  the  Historic  Episcopate  is  the  appointed 
ark  of  Gospel  Salvation,  and  only  by  entering  it 
can  a  person  place  himself  in  assured  covenant  relation- 
ship with  God.  Passing  by  for  the  present  the  difficulties 
which  this  statement  will  suggest  to  the  minds  of  non- 
Episcopalian  readers,  let  us  first  see  what  reasonably 
may  be  inferred  from  the  Scriptures  and  what  light  the 
writings  of  the  Fathers  and  Doctors  throw  upon  the 
subject. 

It  must  be  evident  to  every  attentive  reader  of  the 
Bible  that  it  divides  the  human  race  into  two  great 
classes—those  who  are  in  covenant  relationship  with 
God,  and  those  who  are  without  the  pale  of  his  cove- 
nanted mercies.  A  religious  covenant  is  an  agreement 
which  God  condescends  to  enter  into  with  man.  Be- 
tween man  and  man  there  are,  speaking  broadly,  two 
kinds  of  agreements— the  commercial  and  the  beneficent. 
The  former  has  in  view  mutual  profit,  but  the  latter  is 
of  no  benefit  to  the  contracting  party  who  takes  the 
initiative  except  the  satisfaction  he  experiences  in  the 
effort  to  bless.  Where  a  covenant  between  God  and 
man  exists  it  is  of  course  so  far  as  He  is  concerned  one 
of  grace. 

The  importance  of  entering  into  such  relationship 
with  God  may  be  inferred  from  the  fact  that  the  Creator 
Himself  proposes  it .  He  certainly  would  not  do  so,  if  it 
were  a  trifling  matter.  Our  falling  in  with  this  proposal 
must,  therefore,  contribute  to  our  highest  eternal  welfare 


THE    APPOINTED    ARK    OF    SALVATION. 


189 


and  to  the  great  glory  of  God.    The  same  may  be  in- 
ferred even  more  clearly  from  the  fact  that  both  the 
Jewish  and  Christian  Scriptures  are  called  Testaments, 
a  word  which  in  Holy  Writ  is  synonymous  with  cove- 
nant;  indeed  the  titles  of  Old  and  New  Testaments  arose 
from  an  inaccurate  rendering  in  the  Latin  Vulgate  of 
the  word  meaning  covenant  by  testainentum.   It  would 
be  a  decided  gain  if  the  correct  titles  could  be  used.    In 
the  Revised  Version  of  the  New  Testament  the  word 
"  covenant "  is  almost  without  exception  the  translation. 
Now  the  title  of  a  book  or  of  a  collection  of  writings 
is  drawn  from  the  chief  subject  treated  of.    The  fact  that 
the  Bible  is  divided  into  Old  and  New  Covenants  is 
therefore  very  instructive.    It  shows  that  God  not  only 
proposes  to  enter  into  covenant  relationship  with  us, 
but  that  He  makes  it  the  principal  topic  of  His  Revela- 
tion, which  He  would  not  do  if  it  were  not  supremely 
important.    The  Church  is  the  ark  of  Salvation  because 
only  by  entering  it  and  by  remaining  in  it,  can  a  person 
be  in  covenant  relationship  with  God.    That  under  the 
Old  Dispensation  none  could  establish  this  relationship 
except  by  membership  in  the  Jewish  Church  is,  in  the 
light  of  the  Law  and  the  Prophets,  so  manifest  that  I 
presume  it  will  not  be  questioned  by  any ;  and   since 
membership  in  the  Church  of  God  was  so  necessary  in 
the  Old  Dispensation,  all  will  admit  that  we  ought  not 
to  conclude  without  the  best  of  reasons  that  it  is  any 
less  so  in  the  New.    There  is,  however,  no  ground  for 
such  a  conclusion.    On  the  contrary,  all  the  facts  point 
in  the  other  direction.    God  does  not  change;  the  con- 
dition and  needs  of  mankind  have  remained  the  same; 
and  Christ  expressly  declares   that  He  came  not   to 
destroy,  but  to  fulfill  the  Old  Covenant   Scriptures. 
These  considerations,  though  falling  short  of  a  positive 
proof  that  the  Church  occupies  as  important  a  place  in 


w 


i  I 


I 

J. 


OUR   CONTROVERSY    AVITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

tlie  present  Dispensation  as  in  the  preceding,  render  it 
at  least  highly  improbable  that  the  assertion  to  the 
contrary  is  true. 

But  that  which  we  have  seen  to  be  antecedently 
probable  must  be  apparent,  it  would  seem,  to  all  who 
have  the  least  familiarity  with  the  Gospels  and  Epis- 
tles. These  when  taken  as  a  whole,  and  especially  when 
interpreted  in  the  light  of  the  writings  of  the  Fathers 
who  lived  nearest  the  time  of  the  Apostles,  leave  no 
room  for  reasonable  doubt  that  he  who  would  be  in 
covenant  relationship  with  God  and  thus  make  sure 
that  he  is  an  inheritor  of  Gospel  Salvation,  must  be  a 
member  of  the  Apostolic  Church.  Those  who  think 
that  they  have  made  their  calling  and  election  sure 
because  they  have  been  converted  and  are  in  the  enjoy- 
ment of  experimental  religion,  that  is,  have,  as  they 
say,  the  witness  of  the  Spirit  that  they  are  saved,  will 
find  it  difficult  to  explain  satisfactorily  many  of  the 
most  striking  passages  of  the  New  Testament. 

Why,  for  example,  did  our  Lord  in  His  commission 
to  the  Apostles  connect  Baptism  with  the  preaching  of 
the  Gospel  and  the  teaching  of  obedience?  Why  was 
Baptism  administered  to  the  three  thousand  upon 
whom,  on  the  Day  of  Pentecost,  the  Holy  Ghost  fell? 
Or  why  to  St.  Paul  who,  upon  the  occasion  of  his  mirac- 
ulous conversion,  was  smitten  to  the  ground  and  made 
blind  by  the  heavenly  light?  Or  to  Cornelius  who  had 
the  assurance  of  an  angel  that  he  was  accepted  of  God  ? 
These  and  many  similar  questions  cannot  be  answered 
by  those  who  attach  little  or  no  importance  to  the  Ec- 
clesiastical  side  of  the  Gospel.  The  theory  that  salva- 
tion is  offered  upon  the  condition  of  conversion,  is  one 
of  those  half  truths  which  leave  a  large  part  of  the  New 
Testament  unexplained  and  inexplicable.  In  the  Chris- 
tian Dispensation  as  in  the  Jewish  there  can  be  no 


THE    APPOINTED    ARK    OF    SALVATION. 


191 


assurance  of  salvation  outside  of  the  covenant  relation- 
ship, and  this  cannot  be  entered  now  any  more  than  it 
could  then  by  faith  and  conversion  alone,  but  with  these 
through  the  door  of  membership  in  the  Church  which 
has  come  down  to  us  from  Christ  through  Bishops  of  the 
Apostolic  Succession.  Nevertheless  baptized  Denomi- 
nationalists  as  well  as  Greek,  Roman,  and  Anglican 
Catholics  are  regarded  as  members  of  this  Church, 
because  Baptism  may  be  valid  although  not  regular. 
To  many  this  will  look  as  if  we  exalted  the  Church  at  the 
expense  of  what  they  call  "vital  religion."  But  faith, 
conversion,  and  other  Evangelical  doctrines  are  not 
really  undervalued  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  It  is  not 
that  we  make  less  of  these  doctrines  but  more  of  the 
Church  than  Denominationalists  do.  We  think  that  the 
Scriptures  justify  us  in  this;  and  to  verify  the  correctness 
of  our  interpretation  of  them  to  this  effect,  we  appeal  to 
the  writings  of  those  who  lived  nearest  to  the  time  of  the 
Apostles.  Do  they  teach  that  only  members  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Church  are  in  covenant  relationship  with  God? 

Ignatius,  of  Antioch,  a.  d.  107,  as  we  have  just 
seen,  says:  '* Where  the  Bishop  appears,  there  let  the 
people  be,  as  where  is  Christ  Jesus,  there  is  the  Catholic 
Church."  Again,  ''He  who  is  within  the  Sanctuary  is 
pure;  he  who  is  outside  is  impure,  that  is  to  say,  he 
who  does  anything  apart  from  Bishop  and  Presbytery 
and  Deacons,  is  not  pure  in  his  conscience."  "If  anyone 
follows  a  separatist,  he  does  not  inherit  the  Kingdom 
of  God."  So  also  Irenaeus,  Bishop  of  Lyons,  a.  d.  180, 
who  represents  the  Churches  of  Gaul  and  Asia,  where  he 
had  been  brought  up:  "In  the  Church  God  placed 
Apostles,  Prophets,  Doctors,  and  the  whole  operation  of 
the  Spirit,  and  all  who  do  not  have  recourse  to  the 
Church  do  not  participate  in  Him,  but  deprive  them- 
selves of  life.    For  where  the  Church  is,  there  is  the 


192        .0U«  mSfOmrERSY   with    DEHimiNATIONALISTS. 

Spirit  of  God,  and  wbere  tie  Spirit  of  God  is,  there 
is  the  Church  and  all  grace.''  *'  God  will  judge  all  those 
who  make  schisms.  No  reformation  can  be  wrought 
by  them,  which  can  compensate  for  the  injury  of  the 
schism.  God  will  judge  all  those  who  are  outside  the 
Church."  And  Cyprian,  of  Africa,  A.  d.  250:  "Who- 
soever shall  be  found  without  the  Church,  will  be  cut  off 
from  the  number  of  sons.  He  will  not  have  God  for  his 
Father,  who  refused  to  have  the  Church  for  his  Mother." 
"To  separate  from  the  Church  is  to  deny  that  Christ 
came  in  the  flesh ;  because  it  is  to  scatter  that  which  He 
gathered  together  in  one.  This  is  to  be  Antichrist!" 
"If  a  separatist  should  lay  down  his  life  for  the  name  of 
Christ,  he  would  dieunblest."  "The  House  of  God  is 
one,  and  no  man  can  have  salvation  except  in  the 
Church."  He  also  speaks,  as  did  some  copies  of  the 
earlier  Baptismal  Creeds,  of  "remission  of  sins,  and 
eternal  life  through  the  Church."  Origen,  a.  d.  230, 
says,  "Outside  this  House,  that  is  to  say,  outside  the 
Church,  no  one  has  salvation." 

This  language,  astounding  as  it  must  be  to  modern 
Denominationalists,  is  not  as  strong  as  that  used  by 
the  renowned  Augustine,  A.  d.  398.  He  spoke  as  fol- 
lows of  a  class  of  sectaries,  who,  as  respects  their  doc- 
trinal teaching,  were  certainly  orthodox:  "I  do  not 
assert  that  if  a  Donatist  should  profess  to  have  suf- 
fered any  injuries  in  the  cause  of  his  party,  or  to  have 
endured  temporal  losses,  it  would  profit  him  nothing;  I 
say  more.  I  say,  that  if  he  should  suffer  without  the 
pale  of  the  Church,  it  will  be  as  the  enemy  of  Christ ;  and 
if  one  of  Christ's  enemies  should  say  to  him,  being  with- 
out the  Church,  'Offer  sacrifice  to  our  idols,  worship 
our  gods,'  and  he,  through  refusing  to  worship,  should 
be  slain  by  the  enemy  of  Christ,  his  blood  he  may  pour 
out,  a  crown  he  cannot  receive."    "The  Holy  mountain 


THE    APPOINTED    ARK    OF    SALVATION. 


193 


of  God,"  he  says  elsewhere,  "is  His  Holy  Church.  Those 
who  are  not  in  communion  with  her  will  not  attain 
to  everlasting  life."  And  still  more  pointedly,  "Christ 
is  the  head  and  Saviour  of  His  Body.  Outside  this 
Body  the  Holy  Spirit  gives  life  to  none."  Jerome, 
A.  D.  390:  "As  from  Adam  and  his  wife  the  whole 
race  of  men  have  sprung,  so  of  Christ  and  His  Church 
the  whole  multitude  of  believers  are  begotten."  He 
also  compares  the  Church  to  the  Ark.  "What  the 
Ark  was  in  the  Deluge,  that  the  Church  is  in  the 
world." 

"Clement,  A.  d.  194,  and  Origen,  a.  d.  230,"  says 
Canon  Gore,  "alike  endeavored  to  mitigate  this  doc- 
trine of  exclusive  salvation  within  the  Church,  so  as  to 
bring  it  into  harmony  with  God's  universal  purposes, 
with  his  recognized  equity  and  good-will  towards  all, 
and  with  the  universal  presence  of  the  Word  to  all  men. 
But  with  all  this  it  is  an  undoubted  truth  that  they  did, 
like  all  the  other  Fathers,  regard  God's  covenant  in 
Christ  as  made  with  a  visible  society,  membership  in 
which  was  of  universal  obligation,  and  alienation  from 
which  was  death." 

"It  is  sometimes  argued,"  observes  the  same  pro- 
found author,  "that  St.  Paul  could  not  have  believed  in 
Salvation  through  the  Church,  because  this  contradicts 
his  doctrine  of  the  justifying  effect  of  individual  faith. 
But  in  fact  there  is  no  such  contradiction.  The  Chris- 
tian life  is  a  correspondence  between  the  grace  commu- 
nicated from  without  and  the  inward  faith  which, 
justifying  us  before  God,  opens  out  the  avenues  of  com- 
munication between  man  and  God,  and  enables  man  to 
appropriate  and  to  use  the  grace  which  he  receives  in 
Christ.  There  is  thus  no  antagonism,  though  there  is  a 
distinction  between  grace  and  faith.  Now,  grace  comes 
to  Christians  through  social  Sacraments,  as  members 

C.  A.— 13 


IM 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    DENOMlNATlONALISTS. 


©f  one  'spirit-bearing  body.'  *By  one  Spirit  we  are 
all  baptized  into  one  body;'  ^we  being  many  are  one 
bread  and  one  body,  for  we  are  all  partakers  of  that  one 
bread.'  Thus  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  as  the  house- 
hold of  grace  is  the  complement,  not  the  contradic- 
tion of  the  doctrine  of  faith.  Faith  is  no  faith  if  it 
isolates  a  man  from  the  fellowship  of  the  one  body,  and 
the  one  body  has  no  salvation  except  for  the  sons  of 
faith." 

The  Patristic  doctrine  of  salvation  only  in  the 
Church,  harsh  as  it  now  sounds  to  Denominationalists, 
is  no  other  than  that  held  by  their  spiritual  ancestors. 
The  Presbyterian  Westminster  Confession  put  forth  in 
A.  D.  1647  speaks  of  the  visible  Church  as  ''the  house 
and  family  of  God,  out  of  which  there  is  no  ordinary 
possibility  of  salvation." 


IV. 

THE  DEPOSITORY  OF  SACRAMENTAL  GRACE, 

•*He,  Ransomer  from  death,  and  Light  from  shade, 
Now  gives  His  holy  grace,  His  Saints  to  aid. 
Approach  ye  then  with  faithful  heart  sincere, 
And  take  the  safeguard  of  salvation  here." 

Not  only  is  it  necessary  to  enter  the  Apostolic  Church 
in  order  to  establish  covenant  relationship  with  God, 
but  also  because  she  is  the  depository  of  Sacramental 
grace  of  which  her  Ministers  are  the  sole  authorized 
dispensers.  The  subjective  blessings  of  valid  Sacra- 
ments, that  is,  of  Sacraments  administered  by  Ministers 
of  Apostolic  authority,  may  come  to  those  who  receive 
them  at  the  hands  of  an  unauthorized  ministry ;  but 
the  benefits  of  Baptism,  Confirmation  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  are  not  wholly  of  a  subjective  character  any 


THE    DEPOSITORY    OF    SACRA>[ENTAL    GRACE. 


195 


more  than  are  the  benefits  of  prayer.  To  those  who 
ask  in  faith  and  in  accordance  with  the  will  of  God, 
prayer,  besides  giving  right  direction  to  inward  dispo- 
sitions, secures  to  the  petitioner  spiritual  and  temporal 
blessings.  In  like  manner  valid  Sacraments  when  re- 
ceived in  faith  and  repentance  assure  the  recipient  that 
he  is  a  child  of  God  and  an  heir  and  joint  heir  with 
Christ  to  the  life  which  now  is  and  to  that  which  is  to 
come.  Nor  is  this  all.  Such  Sacraments  also  remit  sins 
and  convey  strength  to  live  a  life  of  righteousness. 

I  am  not  saying  that  the  Sacraments  of  non-Episco- 
palians do  not  convey  these  blessings,  but  that  there  is 
no  assurance  that  they  do;  indeed  tlieir  ministers  do 
not  claim  to  administer  Sacramental  grace.  On  the 
contrary  they  maintain  that  the  benefits  of  the  Sac- 
raments are  purely  subjective,  and  condemn  as  Romish 
superstition  and  error  the  doctrine  which  has  been 
taught  in  every  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  from  the 
beginning;  namely,  that  the  Sacraments  are  channels 
of  grace.  If  it  be  true  that  the  Roman  Church  teaches 
that  they  work  by  magic  or  charm  to  save  their 
recipients,  she  is  in  so  far  clearly  unscriptural.  Repent- 
ance and  faitli  are  alway  spoken  of,  or  im])lied,  in 
connection  with  the  administration  of  Holy  Baptism, 
and,  in  the  sixth  chapter  of  the  Gospel  according  to  St. 
John,  in  which  eternal  life  and  the  resurrection  are 
plainly  made  dependent  upon  the  Sacramental  eating 
and  drinking  of  Christ's  body  and  blood,  faith  and 
coming  to  Christ  are  also  connected  with  the  resurrec- 
tion and  life  everlasting. 

As  in  many  other  particulars,  so  in  respect  to  her 
doctrine  of  the  nature  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  it  will  be  discovered 
upon  examination,  that  the  Anglo-CathoHc  Church  of 
which  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  is  a  branch, 


lii         OUR    CONTROVERSY   WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

occupies  the  middle  ^ound  between  the  Koman  Catholic 
Church  and  the  various  Protestant  bodies  of  Christians. 
This  position  is  due  to  the  fact  that  at  the  Keforma- 
tion  the  Mother  Church  of  England,  from  which  the 
American  daughter  has  not  departed  in  any  essential 
of  doctrine  or  ceremony,  returned  to  the  ground  that 
she  had  occupied  in  the  earliest  and  purest  ages,  while 
the  Roman  Church  continued  in  her  Mediaeval  de- 
partures, and  the  sixteenth  century  and  later  Denomi- 
nations have  gone  off  quite  as  far  in  the  opposite 
direction. 

Anglo-Catholics  connect  salvation  with  the  Sacra- 
ments and  with  faith  and  repentance.  All  that  is 
Scriptural  and  essential  in  the  Roman  and  Protestant 
views  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  we  hold.  For 
with  the  one  we  agree  that,  "the  Sacraments  are  gen- 
erally necessary  to  salvation  and  that  they  work  invis- 
ibly in  us  and  do  not  only  quicken,  but  also  strengthen 
and  confirm  our  faith  in  Christ ;  "  and  with  the  other  we 
hold  that  the  Sacraments  "have  a  wholesome  effect 
and  operation  in  such,  only,  as  worthily  receive  the 
same  by  a  death  unto  sin,  and  a  new  birth  unto  right- 
eousness, by  repenting  themselves  truly  of  their  former 
sins,  by  having  a  lively  faith  in  God's  mercy  through 
Christ  with  a  thankful  remembrance  of  His  death,  and 
by  being  in  charity  with  all  men." 

In  all  ages  there  have  been  many  who  have  depreci- 
ated the  importance  of  external  rites  and  ceremonies. 
This  is  the  tendency  of  a  large  element  even  in  the  An- 
glican Communion,  and  it  is  so  in  all  the  Protestant 
bodies  about  us.  Surely  those  who  are  inclined  to 
under-estimatethe  Sacraments  have  not  well  considered 
the  fact  that  they  were  instituted  by  Christ  Himself  at  a 
time  when  the  evil  of  externalism  was  at  its  height 
in  the  Jewish  Church.    He  was  familiar  with  this  evil, 


THE    DEPOSITORY    OF    SACRAMENTAL   GRACE. 


197 


and  often  inveighed  against  it,  and  yet  He  made  the 
very  existence  and  continuance  of  His  Kingdom  to  de- 
pend upon  external  observances.  This  is  unaccountable 
unless  we  infer,  as  under  the  circumstances  we  must, 
that  there  is  an  intimate  and  vital  connection  between 
divinely  instituted  externalism  and  deep  piety  and  gen- 
uine spirituality.  And  that  there  is  such  a  connection 
is  further  indicated  by  the  constant  practice  of  the 
Apostolic  and  primitive  Church.  The  Apostles,  them- 
selves, and  those  next  to  them,  who  lived  nearest  to  the 
time  of  the  great  Head  of  the  Church,  and  consequently 
knew  most  about  His  teaching,  unquestionably  re- 
garded the  external  rites  of  Baptism  and  the  Lord's 
Supper  as  inseparably  connected  with  salvation.  We  are 
willing  to  grant  that  they  made  as  much  of  repentance 
and  faith  as  a  modern  Methodist,  but  while  admitting 
this  we  must  insist  that  the  Apostles,  Fathers  and  Doc- 
tors attached  as  much  importance  to  Baptism  and  the 
Lord's  Supper  as  the  ancient  Jews  did  to  Circumcision 
and  the  Passover.  The  proof  of  this  is  abundant  in 
nearly  every  chapter  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  and 
on  almost  every  page  of  the  Fathers.  All  who  would  be 
saved  were  ui'ged  to  be  baptized  without  delay,  and  the 
early  Christians  seldom,  if  ever,  met  without  celebrating 
the  Holy  Communion.  Some  of  us  might  make  more 
of  certain  doctrines  which  Denomination alists  magnify, 
but  none  can  esteem  and  use  valid  Sacraments  less 
without  diminishing  the  aids  to  holy  living. 

Before  the  Ascension  it  was  Christ  onlv,  and  after- 
wards  the  Apostles,  or  those  whom  they  commissioned, 
who  dispensed  the  Bread  of  Life  in  the  Lord's  Supper. 
It  was  as  necessary  to  receive  this  Heavenly  food  at 
their  hands  as  to  continue  in  their  doctrine  and  fellow- 
ship and  the  appointed  worship.  We  read  of  the  three 
thousand,  who  believed  and  were  added  to  the  Church 


198 


OUR  COUTEOVERSY   WITH   PBHOMIITATIONALISTS. 


THE    DEPOSITORY    OF    SACRAMENTAL    GRACE. 


199 


i 


by  Baptism,  that  ^'They  contmtred  steadfastly  in  the 
Apostles'  doctrine  and  fellowship,  and  in  the  breaking 
of  bread  and  in  the  prayers."  The  only  way  in  which 
Christians  of  later  days  can  imitate  the  example  of  the 
first  Disciples  is  by  adhering  to  the  Bishop  of  the  Apos- 
tolic Succession  who  has  been  canouically  placed  over 
them.    At  least  so  taught  the  Fathers. 

"Let  no  man,"  wrote  the  Apostolic  Ignatius  when 
on  his  way  to  martyrdom,  a.  d.  107,  "let  no  man  be 
deceived.    If  anyone  be  not  within  the  precinct  of  the 
Altar,  he  lacketh  the  bread  of  God .    For,  if  the  prayer  of 
one  and  another  hath  so  great  force,  how  much  more 
that  of  the  Bishop  and  of  the  whole  Church."    *^Let 
us,  therefore,  be  careful  not  to  resist  the  Bishop,  that  by 
our  submission  we  may  give  ourselves  to  God.    And  in 
proportion  as  a  man  seeth  that  his  Bishop  is  silent,  let 
him  fear  him  the  more.    For  everyone  whom  the  Mas- 
ter of  the  household  sendeth  to  be  His  steward  over 
His  own  house,  we  ought  so  to  receive  as  Him  that 
sent  him.    Plainly,  therefore,  we  ought  to  regard  the 
Bishop  as  the  Lord  Himself."    "For  as  many  as  are 
of  God  and  of  Jesus  Christ,  they  are  with  the  Bishop; 
and  as  many  as  shall  repent  and  enter  into  the  unity 
of  the  Church,  these   also   shall  be  of  God.    Be  not 
deceived,  my  brethi-en,  if  any  man  followeth  one  that 
maketh  a  schism,  he  doth  not  inherit  the  Kingdom  of 
God.    If  any  man  walketh  in  strange  doctrine,  he  hath 
no  fellowship  with  the  passion."    ''  Be  ye  careful,  there- 
fore, to  observe  one  Eucharist  [that  is,  the  Holy  Com- 
munion], for  there  is  one  flesh  of  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ 
and  one  Cup  unto  union  in  His  blood ;  there  is  one 
Altar,  as  there  is  one  Bishop,  together  with  the  Pres- 
bytery and  the  Deacons,  my  fellow-servants."    "  Let  no 
man  do  aught  of  things  pertaining  to  the  Church  apart 
from  the  Bishop.    Let  that  be  held  a  valid  Eucharist 


which  is  under  the  Bishop  or  one  to  whom  he  shall 
have  committed  it.  Wheresoever  the  Bishop  shall  ap- 
pear, there  let  the  people  be;  even  as  where  Jesus  may 
be,  there  is  the  Universal  Church.  It  is  not  lawful  apart 
from  the  Bishop  either  to  baptize  or  to  hold  a  love- 
feast  ;  but  whatever  he  shall  approve,  this  is  well- 
pleasing  also  to  God;  that  everything  which  ye  do 
may  be  sure  and  valid." 

"Athanasius,"says  Canon  Gore,  "endeavors  to  recall 
a  Bishop  who  in  time  of  persecution  had  been  guilty  of 
fleeing  from  his  duty,  in  part  by  reminding  him  of 
monks  who  have  made  good  Bishops,  but  principally 
by  recalling  to  his  mind  the  dignity  of  the  Episcopate, 
as  instituted  by  Christ  through  His  Apostles  and  hav- 
ing, therefore,  not  merely  the  authority  of  the  Church 
but  the  authority  of  Christ  Himself,  and  as  being  the 
essential  condition  of  the  continuous  life  of  the  Church 
and  the  handing  down  of  grace." 

V. 

OBJECTIONS  ANSWERED. 

THIS  Lecture  would  be  incomplete  without  some 
reply  to  the  principal  objections  which,  judging 
from  my  own  experience,  must  inevitably  have 
presented  themselves  to  the  Denominational  reader. 
Hewill,of  course,  perceive,  as  I  did,  that  such  arguments 
tend  to  unchurch  the  non-Episcopal  bodies ;  to  make  it 
an  imperative  duty  to  go  out  from  them,  and  to  enter 
some  undoubted  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church;  to 
\  invalidate  the  ministry  and  sacraments  of  non-Episco- 
palians, and  to  limit  covenanted  salvation  to  the  his- 
toric Catholic  Church.  All  this, it  will  be  said,  is  unmit- 
igated and  intolerable  bigotry.    In  a  generation,  which, 


<  r 


200 


OUE   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


like  ours,  glories  in  its  creedless  liberality,  this  appar- 
ently  well-founded  accusation  will  settle  the  whole  mat- 
ter in  the  minds  of  the  great  majority,  who  have  been 
led  on  by  curiosity  to  follow  me  thus  far. 

A  long  experience  in  a  position  which  has  brought 
me  in  contact  with  great  numbers  of  non-Episcopalians, 
does  not  encourage  the  hope  that  there  is  anything  to 
be  said  which  will  prevent  most  of  us  from  parting  com- 
pany at  the  end  of  this  lecture.    Nevertheless,  Episco- 
palians, as  might  be  expected,  have  their  ready  answer 
to  these,  as  to  all  other  objections,  that  are  urged 
against  their  Church,  which,  in  each  and  every  case,  is 
so  far  satisfactory  as  to  clear  the  way  for  the  continu- 
ous procession  of  intelligent  Denominationalists,  who 
are  coming  into  the  Episcopal  Church  at  the  rate  of 
about  twenty  thousand  annually.    Though  this  is  a 
great  host,  all  who  have  completed  their  Churchward 
journey  believe  that  it  would  be  far  greater,  if  inherited 
prejudice  and  the  popular  cry  against  illiberality  did 
not  deter  many  from  investigating  the  claims  of  the 
Church.    Nine  out   of  every  ten  who  hear   and  read 
enough  really  to  understand  these  claims,  sooner  or 
later  identify  themselves  with  us.    The  truth  of  this 
statement  will  be  established  in  other  connections. 

1.  The  propositions  which  we  have  been  considering 
are  objected  to,  because,  if  followed  to  their  logical  con- 
clusion, they  unchurch  the  various  non-Episcopal  bod- 
ies of  Christians.  The  edge  of  this  objection  will  be 
blunted  by  the  explanation  that,  though  we  do  not  rec- 
ognize a  society  which  was  organized  by  a  human 
agency  only  three  hundred  years  ago,  more  or  less,  as  a 
branch  of  the  Divine  Institution  of  which  we  read  in  the 
New  Testament,  yet  we  do  admit  that  all  its  members, 
who  have  been  duly  baptized  with  water  in  the  Name  of 
the  Father  and  of  the  Son  and  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  are 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


201 


members  of  the  "One,  Holy,  Catholic  Church  of  Christ," 
as  really  as  ourselves.  The  difference  between  them  and 
us  is,  that  they  are  living  in  schism  while  we  are  not. 
Nevertheless,  by  reason  of  their  Baptism,  they  are  Chris- 
tians. 

If  I  mistake  not  there  are  several  of  the  Denomina- 
tions whose  representatives,  if  true  to  the  convictions 
J  which  prevail  among  them,  could  not  say  as  much  of 
^  Episcopalians.  Consistency  would  require  them  to  call 
\  our  Christianity  in  question,  because  we  are  not  united 
to  Christ  by  a  particular  form  of  Baptism  or  by  some 
special  kind  of  faith  and  experience.  At  any  rate  it 
cannot  truthfully  be  said  that  any  of  the  leading  and 
so-called  orthodox  Denominations  are  more  liberal  than 
we  are  in  the  cordial  recognition  of  Christian  brethren 
who  are  outside  of  our  respective  communions.  Thus,  if 
we  unchurch  the  Denominations  we  do  not  unchristianize 
their  members.  According  to  our  understanding,  their 
case  is  very  much  like  that  of  those  who  belonged  to 
the  great  revolt  effected  by  Jeroboam.  "  The  ten  tribes 
did  not  cease  to  be  Hebrews.  They  were  still  brought 
by  circumcision  into  covenant  with  God ;  they  are  still 
addressed  as  His  chosen  people.  Their  Priests  are  never 
recognized  as  the  Priests  of  God ;  their  ministrations  are 
always  stigmatized  as  illegitimate ;  but  the  people,  be- 
ing Israelites  and  being  circumcised,  are  still  accounted 
the  elect  or  chosen  people  of  God,  are  always  recognized 
as  belonging  to  the  one  body.  Wide  as  was  the  breach 
which  Jeroboam  made,  it  did  not  split  the  'common- 
wealth of  Israel '  into  two.  He  sinned  grievously  him- 
self, and  he  '  made  Israel  to  sin ' — ^in  fact,  it  is  beyond 
all  doubt  that  separation  in  that  age  was  wholly  sinful. 
But,  notwithstanding  the  schism,  the  Jewish  Church  re- 
mained one.  Not  even  Jeroboam,  the  great  heresiarch, 
who  carried  five-sixths  of  the  congregation  of  Israel 


202         OUR  CONTROVEBST   WITH   I>1M0IIINATI0NALISTS. 

aloiig*  Wftli  him— Jeroboam,  whom  God  appointed  to 
rule  over  the  ten  tribes— could  found  a  new  Church  or 
people  of  God." 

It  has  been  asked,  "But,  how  do  you  account  for  the 
blessing  which  has  attended  the  labors  of  the  various 
Denominations,  if  they  are  not  true  Churches  of  Christ?" 
In  the  same  way  that  we  account  for  the  successes  of 
the  Young  Men's  Christian  Association  or  of  the  Salva- 
tion Army.  God's  abounding  grace  constantly  over- 
flows its  channels.  God  forbid  that  we  should  deny  for 
a  moment  the  good  and  holy  work  done  for  Him  by  the 
Denominations.  Why  should  we?  It  is  the  work  of  our 
fellow-Christians,  and  it  is  because  they  are  Christians 
by  Baptism,  and  not  because  the  societies  to  which 
they  belong  are  Churches,  that  God  has  blessed  their 
preaching  and  endeavors. 

Denominationalists  usually  justify  their  separation 
from  the  Historic  Church  of  our  race  upon  the  ground 
that  they  were  "kicked  out."  In  proof  of  this  they 
mention  the  fact  that  a  large  number  of  self-constituted 
ministers,  who  had  been  intruded  into  English  l)enefices 
in  the  Revolutionary  period,  were  ejected  upon  the 
restoration  of  the  monarchy,  and  that  many  of  the 
Church  of  England  pulpits  were  closed  against  John 
and  Charles  Wesley.  We  answer  that  even  if  such  ejec- 
tions and  exclusions  could  be  shown  to  have  been 
wholly  unjust  and  reprehensible,  they  afford  no  excuse 
for  the  sin  of  schism.  Two  wrongs  do  not  make  one 
right.  Even,  though,  for  the  sake  of  argument,  it  be 
conceded  that  the  Independents  and  Methodists  met 
with  unjust  and  harsh  treatment,  yet  it  cannot  be  ad- 
mitted that  they  were  compelled  to  leave  the  Church; 
for  many  of  the  leaders  of  both  movements  remained  in 
the  Church  all  their  days,  and  died  in  her  communion. 
Besides,  there  is  really  no  such  thing  as  "  kicking"  peo- 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


203 


pie  out  of  the  Catholic  Church.  They  can  be  made  to 
endure  wrong  and  cruel  persecution,  but  they  cannot 
be  cut  off  from  the  Body  of  Christ  of  which  they  were 
made  members  at  Holy  Baptism.  Not  even  excommu- 
nication will  do  this.  It  may  prevent  participatioi;  in 
the  benefits  of  the  means  of  grace.  But,  those,  who  at 
various  times  since  the  middle  of  the  sixteenth  century, 
have  left  the  English  and  American  Episcopal  Churches, 
were  not  even  excommunicated.  They  went  out  of  their 
own  accord.  If  vve  look  at  the  matter  from  the  stand- 
point of  Denominationalists,  the  most  charitable  ex- 
planation of  their  conduct  is  that  they  were  unwilling 
to  suffer  wrongfully  for  the  sake  of  Christ.  In  this  respect 
the  followers  of  John  Wesley,  if  the  representations 
respecting  the  persecutions  which  he  endured  are  true, 
did  not  imitate  his  example,  for,  according  to  many 
accounts  that  we  have  seen,  he  could  not  be  ^'kicked 
out."  There  is,  however,  room  for  doubt  whether  cre- 
dence should  be  given  to  all  that  has  been  published  on 
this  subject.  Mr.  Wesley,  himself,  never  accused  the 
Church  of  casting  him  out— least  of  all  in  his  last  days— 
when,  he  tells  us,  he  had  **more  invitations  to  preach 
in  Churches  than  he  could  accept  of;"  when  many  of  the 
Clergy  were  "prejudiced  in  favor  of  the  Methodists;" 
when,  as  his  biographer  Tyerman  says, "  he  was  invited  in 
all  parts  of  the  country  by  Rectors,  Vicars,  Curates,  and 
others  to  favor  them  with  his  services.  An  eminent 
Methodist  in  a  "  Contemporary  Review  "  article,  has  tes- 
tified that,  on  the  whole,  the  Bishops  treated  Wesley  bet- 
ter than  he  could  have  expected.  "So  persistent  were 
Wesley's  irregularities  that  it  has  always  seemed  to  me 
that  great  indulgence  on  the  part  of  the  Bishops  was 
exercised,  or  he  would  have  been,  in  every  Diocese,  in- 
hibited with  vigor."  Those  who  read  history  through 
Anglican   spectacles   will    continue  to    attribute   our 


204         OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    DE1T0MINATI0NALISTS. 

tiilfbrtuiiate  df  tfsioTis  to  the  Puritanical  Pharisaism  and 
willfulness  of  the  first  Separatists.    No  reflection  is  here 
intended  upon  their  descendants.    Denominationalists 
can  no  more  be  held  responsible  for  the  sins  of  their 
ancestors,  except  in  so  far  as  they  knowingly  and  delib- 
erately continue  in  them,  than  Episcopalians  can  be  for 
those  of  the  "fox  hunting  parson." 
/     Moreover,  we  must  not  allow  our  objectors  to  forget 
/that,  if  we  unchurch  their  recently  organized  voluntary 
societies,  because  they  have  no  historic  connection  with 
Christ  through  an  Apostolic  and  Canonical  succession 
of  Bishops,  we  are  simply  following  the  example  of  their 
ancestors  who  unchurched  us,  not  only  because  they  in- 
sisted that  the  Presbytery  was  the  only  Divinely  insti- 
tuted form  of  Church  government,  but  also  because  they 
maintained  that  the  whole   Episcopal  establishment 
was  so  utterly  corrupt  that  it  was  not  any  part  of  the 
Church  of  Christ,  but  rather  the  synagogue  of  Satan. 
Heylin,  who  wrote  his  standard  History  of  Puritanism 
and  Life  of  Archbishop  Laud  about  the  time  of  the 
Cromwellian  Kevolution,  thus  summarizes  the  language 
used  by  the  enemies  of  the  Church  in  the  innumerable 
pamphlets  which  in  his  day  were  scattered  broadcast. 
"  They  could  find  no  other  title  for  the  Archbishop  than 
Beelzebub  of  Canterbury,  the  Pope  of  Lambeth,  the 
Canterbury  Caiaphas,  Esau,  a  monstrous  Antichrist,  a 
most  bloody  opposer  of  God's  Saints,   a  very  anti- 
christian  beast,  most  bloody  tyrant.    The  Bishops  are 
described  as  unlawful,  unnatural,  false  and  bastardly 
governors  of  the  Church,  the  ordinances  of  the  devil, 
petty  Popes,  petty  Antichrists,  incarnate  devils,  cog- 
ging,cozening  knaves,  who  lie  like  dogs,  and  so  on." 

When  we  were  thus  not  only  unchurched  but  also 
reviled,  instead  of  retorting  in  kind  upon  the  calum- 
niators  of  the  Church,  Hooker,  Andrews,  Thorudike, 


OBJECTIONS   ANSWERED. 


205 


Taylor,  Laud  and  a  host  of  others  calmly  proved 
by  works  that  have  never  been  answered  that  Episco- 
pacy is  an  essential  part  of  the  Church's  constitution 
and  that,  notwithstanding  the  sins  of  omission  and 
commission  of  which  many  of  her  representatives  in 
high  places  were  guilty,  the  Church  of  England  is  a  true 
branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  Nor  were  our  scholars 
and  Saints  content  with  writing  unanswerable  controver- 
sial works.  They  frankly  confessed  our  short-comings 
and  preached  the  necessity  of  reformation  v/ith  a  fidelity 
and  vigor  that  resulted  in  the  purifying  of  the  body 
Ecclesiastical  and  in  making  her  confessedly  the  great- 
est educational,  missionary,  and  benevolent  agency 
that  the  world  has  ever  known. 

Our  Methodist  brethren  who  seem  to  be  the  most 
deeply  oflended  at  our  alleged  uncharitableness  towards 
other  Christian  bodies  and  have  so  much  to  say  about 
it,  may  be  reminded  that  after  all  we  simply  occupy  the 
ground  that  John  Wesley  took  in  regard  to  all  Separat- 
ists from  the  Historic  Church.  He  never  looked  upon 
the  association  of  which  he  was  the  head  as  anything 
more  than  a  society  within  the  Church.  Nor  would  he 
listen  to  any  suggestion  of  separation,  but  warned  his 
followers  against  it  and  prevented  it  so  long  as  he  lived. 
Dr.  Beet,  who  is  perhaps  the  greatest  living  scholar 
among  English  Methodists,  says:  *' Wesley  had  no 
thought  of  founding  a  community  otitside  the  Anglican 
Church,  and  strongly  urged  his  followers  to  remain  in 
the  ancient  fold."  As  is  well  known  John  and  Charles 
Wesley  both  died  Priests  and  communicants  of  the 
Church  in  good  standing. 

2.  Again,  it  is  objected  that  the  propositions  which 
we  have  been  maintaining,  logically  lead  to  the  conclu- 
sion that  it  is  the  duty  of  n  on -Episcopalians  to  leave 
their  respective  societies  and  to  identify  themselves  with 


i 


( 
( 

' 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    DEN0MINATI0NALIST8. 

some  undoubted  branch  of  the  Divinely  instituted 
Church.  What  we  really  intend  to  teach  is  at  least  ca- 
pable of  statement  in  the  following  less  objectionable 
form :— It  is  the  duty  of  all  Christians  and  of  those  who 
would  become  such,  to  examine  the  relative  claims  of 
the  various  religious  bodies  to  their  allegiance.  Other 
things  being  equal,  we  feel  sure  that  Americans  who 
have  any  regard  for  antiquity  and  for  the  predominat- 
ing judgment  of  Christendom,  will  feel  obliged  to  ally 
themselves  with  some  branch  of  Episcopacy  which  has 
come  down  from  the  Apostles  rather  than  with  any  of  the 
various  forms  of  a  self-constituted  ministry  as  found  in 
Denominationalism.  Until  the  Reformation  practically 
the  whole  of  Christendom  believed  the  "Historic  Episco- 
pate'^  to  be  an  essential  characteristic  of  the  Church 
founded  by  Christ,  and  even  now.  the  vast  majority  of 
Christians  hold  to  this  view.  If  the  teaching  or  practice 
/of  the  early  Church  on  any  point  is  unanimous,  or  nearly 
so,  then  it  is  not  safe  to  draw  conclusions  contrary  to 
it  except  upon  unmistakable  evidences  of  error.  "We 
require  you  to  find  out  but  one  Church  upon  the  face  of 
the  whole  earth,  that  hath  been  ordered  by  your  disci- 
pline, or  hath  not  been  ordered  by  ours,  that  is  to  say, 
by  Episcopal  regiment,  since  the  time  that  the  blessed 
Apostles  were  conversant.''  This  is  the  famous  chal- 
lenge of  Hooker,  who  wrote  at  the  close  of  the  sixteenth 
century  against  the  I'resb^^terians.  It  has  never  yet 
been  met.  Until  non-Episcopalians  can  meet  it,  they 
cannot  reasonably  object  to  the  logic  which  makes  it 
their  duty  to  be  in  communion  with  the  canonical  Bishop 
of  the  region  in  which  they  live. 

3.  It  is  also  objected  that  the  line  of  argument  pur- 
sued in  this  lecture  invalidates  the  Ministry  and  Sacra- 
ments of  Denominationalists,  that  is,  makes  them  of  no 
effect.    If  we  have  said  or  implied  anything  of  this  kind, 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


207 


\ 


we  take  it  all  back.  For  the  truth  is,  instead  of  depreciat- 
ing their  Ministry  and  Sacraments,  we  admit  not  only  all 
for  which  most  Denominationalists  contend,  but,  in  the 
case  of  Baptism  we  go  beyond  their  claim  for  it  by  ac- 
knowledging that  it  makes  the  candidate  "A  member  of 
Christ,  the  child  of  God,  and  an  inheritor  of  the  King- 
dom of  Heaven,"  which  they  deny.  It  must,  however, 
not  be  understood  from  this  acknowledgment  that  we 
concede  a  Divine  Priesthood  to  Denominational  minis- 
tries. We  can  and  do  acknowledge  as  much  of  Baptism 
administered  by  ordinary  Laymen  and  Lay-women. 
But  why  should  they  take  offense  at  our  refusal  to  force 
upon  them  a  character  which  they,  themselves,  repu- 
diate ?[  Denominationalists  generally  deny  that  their 
ministers  are  Priests  and  that  Divine  Grace  is  given 
through  the  channel  of  Sacramental  ordinances.  Ac- 
cording to  their  view  a  minister  is  only  a  commissioned 
preacher,  and  the  Sacraments  are  simply  commemora- 
tive ceremonies.  How  can  they  justly  charge  us  with 
uncharitableness  if  we  simply  take  them  at  their  word 
upon  this  point  ? 

^  "It  is  well  to  understand,"  says  Bishop  Hugh  Miller 
Thompson,  "that  we  have  little,  if  any,  difference  with 
the  'Denominations'  about  their  ministry  and  ordi- 
nances. These  are  valid  for  all  that  is  claimed  for  them. 
They  say  that  their  ministers  are  teachers  of  religion, 
duly  appointed^ and  authorized  by  a  voluntary  society. 
They  are  certainly  this.  They  assert  that  their  ministers 
are  not  Priests  and  have  no  Sacerdotal  power  or  au- 
thority. To  this  assertion  we  assent.  They  profess 
not  to  have  Apostolic  Succession.  We  agree  with  them 
upon  this  point.  They  state  that  they  administer  an 
Ordinance  in  which  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ  are 
not  really  present,  and  are  not  verily  and  indeed  given, 
taken,  and  received ;  but  that  it  is  merely  a  mode  of 


208         OUR   CONTROVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 

recalling  to  their  minds  our  Lord's  death.  This  state- 
ment is  quite  unobjectionable.  About  Baptism  we 
differ  somewhat  from  them,  attributing  to  that  Sac- 
rament, as  administered  by  them,  a  greater  effect  than 
their  own  faith  ventures  to  hope  for.  Administered 
with  water,  in  the  name  of  the  Holy  Trinity,  we  believe 
it  to  regenerate  the  soul  that  duly  receives  it,  and  to 
graft  it  into  the  body  of  Christ's  Church.  So,  we  admit 
their  ministry  to  be  all  that  they  claim  it  to  be;  and  we 
admit  their  ordinances  to  be  in  no  case  less,  and  in  one 
case  more,  than  they,  themselves,  believe.'' 

And  if  there  be  any  Denominationalists  who  claim 
that  their  ministry  is  a  Priesthood  and  that  their  Sac- 
raments are  the  means  through  which  Divine  gifts  are 
received,  the  irritation  caused  by  our  attitude  towards 
non-Episcopacy  may  be  somewhat  soothed  by  the  fact 
that  they  are  not  alone  in  being  called  upon  to  sustain 
the  charge  of  invalidity.  Romanists  are  continually 
representing  our  ministry  and  Sacraments  to  be  invalid. 
There  was  a  time  when  Denominationalists  also  did 
this.  Bishop  Coleman,  speaking  of  the  Puritans  of 
Colonial  days,  says:  "While  some  were  pleased  to  allow 
that  a  clergyman  ordained  by  an  English  Bishop  re- 
quired no  further  credentials  to  officiate  when  called  to 
a  society  of  Congxegationalists,  others  compelled  such 
to  submit  to  a  *  re-ordination  by  the  brethren.'  This 
ceremony  was  gone  through  with,  for  example,  in  the 
case  of  the  Rev.  Thomas  Hooker,  at  Newton,  afterwards 
Cambridge,  in  the  year  1633,  and  of  Master  Cotton,  at 
Boston,  in  the  same  year.  Episcopal  Ordination  was 
even  looked  upon  as  something  for  which  those  receiv- 
ing it  must  needs  apologize,  and  there  seems  to  be 
reason  for  believing  that  in  some  instances  they  were 
obliged  to  recant  it."  Such  treatment  has  never  wor- 
ried us.    Whenever  occasion  has  arisen,  our  writers  and 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


209 


preachers  have  proceeded  to  show  by  unanswerable  ar- 
guments based  upon  Scripture  and  history  that  our 
Ministry  and  Ordinances  are  valid. 

If  Denominationalists  are  sure  of  their  ground,  let 
them,  when  we  call  in  question  their  ministry,  pursue 
the  course  towards  us  that  we  do  towards  Romanists. 
Unfortunately  for  them,  of  those  who  do  this  the 
majority  have  the  experience  of  good  Dr.  Wolff,  of 
missionary  fame,  about  whom  the  following  anecdote  is 
related.  The  Doctor,  burning  with  zeal  to  preach  the 
Gospel  of  Christ,  was  on  one  occasion  traveling  in  some 
out  of  the  way  region  in  the  Orient.  It  was  in  the 
Diocese  of  one  of  the  Bishops  of  the  (jreek  Church;  and 
in  the  course  of  his  wanderings  he  fell  in  with  the  Bishop. 
**Who  are  you?"  said  the  Bishop,  looking  at  him 
rather  suspiciously.  ''A  poor  Missionary,"  said  the 
Doctor.  ^*A  what?"  asked  the  Bishop.  '^A  Mis- 
sionary," repeated  Dr.  Wolff,  pulling  out  his  little  black 
Bible.  And  those  of  us  who  are  old  enough  to  have 
seen  Wolff  fingering  his  Bible,  will  remember  how  it  al- 
ways seemed  to  open  of  itself  at  the  precise  text  he 
wanted.  "I  am  come  to  preach  salvation  to  these 
people.  How  shall  they  call  on  Him  on  whom  they 
have  not  believed  ?  Or  how  shall  they  believe  in  Him  of 
whom  they  have  not  heard?  Or  how  shall  they  hear 
without  a  preacher?"  "  That  is  all  very  well,"  said  the 
Bishop,  "but  why  don't  you  finish  the  text?"  "How 
shall  they  preach  except  they  be  sent  ?"  "Who  sent  you?" 
"Sent?"  said  Wolff.  "Yes,  sent!"  replied  the  Bishop. 
"My  Metropolitan  sent  me,  and  his  predecessors  sent 
him,  and  I  send  my  Priests  and  Deacons.  Now,  who 
sent  you?"  "  The  Spirit  of  the  Lord,"  said  Wolff  boldly; 
for  he  was  not  a  man  to  be  put  out  of  countenance.  "I 
hope  you  do  not  deny  that  Christ  is  able  to  send  His 
own  messenger  without  human  intervention?"    "God 

C.  A  .—14 


210 


OUR   CONTROVERSY   WITH    DEN0MINATI0NALI8TS. 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


211 


forbid  that  I  should  doubt  it  for  a  moment,"  the  Bishop 
answered,  *'  I  know  He  can.  I  know  that  He  sent  Moses 
and  Aaron,  without  human  intervention,  to  establish 
the  Aaronic  Priesthood ;  and  I  know  that  He  superseded 
this  very  Priesthood  of  His  own  Ordination,  by  sendinji: 
also  without  human  intervention  the  Apostolic  Priest- 
hood; and  what  He  did  once  He  can  do  again.  God 
forbid !  that  I  should  doubt  that ;  I  should  be  a  Jew  if  I 
did.  Still  I  do  observe  that  whenever  God  does  send 
anyone  direct  from  Himself  and  without  human  inter- 
vention, He  is  always  gi*aciously  pleased  to  confirm  His 
©wn  appointment  to  the  minds  of  his  faithful  servants 
by  signs  and  wonders.  Moses  called  down  bread  from 
Heaven.  He  and  Aaron  brought  forth  water  from  the 
rock.  And  so,  also,  when  God  was  pleased  to  supersede 
that  Priesthood,  many  wonders  and  signs  were  wrought 
by  the  hands  of  the  Apostles.  They  did  not  go  upon 
their  own  testimoay;  but  appealed  to  these  as  wit- 
nesses; as,  in  the  case  of  their  Master,  Himself,  the  works 
which  they  did  testified  of  them.  Now,''  continued  the 
Bishop,  "  without  at  all  doubting  the  possibility  that  a 
Wolffian  succession  may  be  commissioned  to  supplant 
that  of  the  Apostles,  where  are  your  witnesses?  I  sup- 
pose you  do  not  expect  us  to  take  your  word  for  it. 
What  supernatural  powers  do  you  appeal  to,  in  proof 
of  your  Heavenly  mission?"  This  was  a  puzzling  ques- 
tion. It  had  puzzled  Mahomet  several  hundred  years 
before.  That  false  prophet,  however,  got  out  of  it  clever- 
ly, by  saying  that  he  had  written  the  Koran,  which  as 
everyone  thought,  was  a  miracle  of  itself;  but  poor 
Wolff  could  not  say  that  he  had  written  the  Bible;  so 
he  fell  to  thinking.  The  result  was  that  he  came  home, 
I  will  not  say  a  better  man— for  a  most  excellent  man 
he  always  was— but  by  many  shades  a  wiser  man ;  and 
soon  afterwards  sought  for  Ordination  in  the  regular 


way,  and   was   ordained   by   Bishop   Doane,  of  New 
Jersey. 

/'Nor   has  the  Greek   Bishop  been  the  only  one  to 
/recognize  that  miracles  are  the  necessary  credentials  of 
I  him  who,  without  Episcopal  and  Canonical  Ordination, 
claims  to  have  a  sufficient  call  to  preach  the  Gospel  and 
administer  the  Sacraments.     When  the  Anabaptists 
appealed  to  Luther,  "not  doubting,"  as  the  historian 
fsays,  ''that  he  who  had  first  preached  the  liberty  of  the 
|Gospel  would  pronounce  in  their  favor,"  they  had  cer- 
tainly some  reason  to  be  astonished  at  a  reply  which 
seemed  to  involve  the  formal  renunciation  of  one  of  the 
first  principles  of  his  Reformation.    ('Let  the  Senate 
ask  this  man,"  said  the  Reformer,  when  giving  advice 
about   the  ministerial    pretensions  of  their  would-be 
pastor,  Muncer,  "who  called  him?  and,  if  he  shall  an- 
1  swer, '  God,'  let  them  charge  him  to  prove  his  calling  by 
some  manifest  sign,  which,  if  he  cannot  do,  let  him  be 
repudiated  as  an  impostor."    Under  the  circumstances 
this  was  a  harsh  and  inconsistent  judgment  which  must 
be  as  great  a  source  of  regret  and  embarrassment  to 
the  Lutheran  ministry  as  John  Wesley's  famous  Ser- 
mon CXV,  on  "the  Ministerial  Office,"  is  to  the  Metho- 
dist Ministry. 

4.  Finally,  it  will  be  objected  that  we  limit  cove- 
nanted salvation  to  membership  in  the  historic  Catho- 
lic Church.  But  this  is  not  the  same  as  saying  that 
only  members  of  the  Greek,  Roman,  and  Anglican  Com- 
munions will  be  saved.  As  has  already  appeared  by 
reiterated  statements,  we  acknowledge  all  who  have 
been  baptized  in  the  name  of  the  Trinity  to  be  in  cove- 
nant relationship  with  God.  Nor  is  it  equivalent  to  a 
declaration  that  all  non  church  members  will  be  lost.  I 
suppose  that  there  is  not  an  Episcopalian  to  be  found 
anywhere,  who  believes   that  God's  mercy  does  not 


Mt 


OUB   CONTROVERSY   WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


OBJECTIONS    ANSWERED. 


213 


(' 


I 


.1  ' 


^ 


overflow  the  Church.  But  if  there  were  such,  Denomina- 
tionalists  should  be  the  last  to  accuse  them  of  bigotry  ; 
for,  as  we  have  seen,  their  ancestors,  the  Presbyterians, 
declared  in  their  Westminster  Confession  of  Faith  that 
there  is  a  visible  Catholic  Church,  *'the  house  and 
family  of  God,  out  of  which  there  is  no  ordinary  possi- 
bility of  salvation.'' 

No,  we  do  not  limit  salvation  to  the  adherents  of  the 
Catholic  Church.  What  we  do  say  is  that  covenanted 
or  assured  salvation  is  limited  to  the  Church.  Nor 
do  we,  as  our  objectors  represent,  tie  God's  gifts  of 
grace  and  mercy  to  Sacramental  Ordinances.  Our 
doctrine  is  lucidly  and  concisely  set  forth  in  Dr.  Sea- 
bury's  edition  of  "Haddan's  Apostolical  Succession," 
**  Without  Bishops,  no  Presbyters ;  without  Bishops 
and  Presbyters,  no  legitimate  certainty  of  Sacraments ; 
without  Sacraments,  no  certain  union  with  the  mys- 
tical Body  of  Christ;  without  this,  no  certain  union 
with  Christ;  and  without  that  union,  no  salvation. 
Yet  with  these  necessary  provisos  at  every  step,  by  the 
very  nature  of  the  moral  laws  and  attributes  of  God : 
First,  that  these  outward  things  ma^'  be  had ;  secondly, 
that  due  allowance  be  made  for  ignorance,  prejudice, 
or  necessity ;  thirdly,  that  the  system  be  regarded  as 
subservient  and  ministering  to  a  true  faith,  a  living 
religion,  and  a  hearty  love  of  Christ  in  the  soul." 

We  recognize  the  truth,  that  God  is  free  to  grant  His 
blessings  through  whatever  instrumentality  He  may  see 
fit  to  use,  or  directly  without  any  ceremonial  channel. 
But  are  we  justified  in  concluding  that,  because  God  is 
not  bound  to  the  Ordinances  which  He  has  instituted  as 
the  instruments  of  our  salvation,  we  are  free  to  disre- 
gard them  ?  If  God  be  not  limited,  we  are.  Those  of  us 
who  know  His  appointments,  certainly  are  not  justified 
in  expecting  that  we  can  be  saved  without  using  them. 


We  do  not,  then,  make  the  Church  of  the  Historic  Epis- 
copate to  be  the  only  way  of  salvation,  or  confine  the 
bestowal  of  God's  Grace  to  her  Ministry  and   Sacra- 
ments.   All  we  claim  is  that  they  are  the  Divinely  ap- 
pointed ark  of  satety  and  channels  of  refreshment.  Mul- 
titudes, doubtless,  will  reach  Heaven  by  other  ways. 
But  we  contend  that  it  is,  nevertheless,  required  of  all 
to  deteririiiie  whether  or  not  God  has  appointed  a  way, 
and  if  it  be  found,  to  walk  in  it.    Moreover,  Holy  Scrip- 
ture makes  it  a  duty  to  search  out  and  to  take  ''the 
old  paths,"  rather  than  the  new.    ''  Stand  in  the  ways, 
and  see  and  ask  for  the  old  paths  where  is  the  good 
way,  and  walk  therein,  and  ye  shall  find  rest  for  your 
souls."     These  words  of  the  Prophet   Jeremiah,  ad- 
dressed to  the  perverse  and  erring  people  of  Judah,  are 
full  of  instruction  for  those  who  desire  to  serve  God 
acceptably  under  the  Christian  as  well  as  the  Mosaic 
Dispensation.    At  all  times  entitled  to  the  most  serious 
consideration,  they  are   especially  applicable  to   this 
age.    What  this  precept,  when  applied  to  the  unhappy 
condition  in  which  divided   Christendom   finds   itself, 
requires  is,  that  we  should  all  follow  the  history  of 
the  body  with  which  we  are  identified  and  each  Article 
of  its  distinctive  Creed  back  to  the  place  of  the  parting 
of  ways.     There  we  shall  find  the  way  from  which  all 
others  have  diverged  — ''the  good  way,"  the  way  which 
all  Christians  once  pursued,  the  way  in  which  all,  if  they 
will,  can  walk  again  in  unity  and  brotherly  love,  the 
only  way  by  which  the  hosts  of  Christ  can  progress 
towards  universal  conquest.    The  world  will  never  be 
evangelized  by  a  divided  Church,  and  the  Church  will 
never  be  united  so  long  as  Christians  continue  in  the 
paths  of  their  own  choosing.     All  must  come  back  to 
the  "  old  paths,"  "  the  good  way."    For  nearly  a  thou- 
sand years  Romanists  have  been  wandering  further  and 


I 
1 

!       I 

I 


214 


OUK   CONTEOVERSY    WITH    DENOMINATIONALISTS. 


further  from  this  way  in  one  direction,  and  Denomina- 
tionah'sts,  since  their  beginning,  more  than  three  cen- 
turies ago,  have  been  doing  the  same  in  the  opposite 
course.  Both  of  these  must  follow  the  example  which 
the  Anglican  Communion  set  at  the  Reformation,  by 
retracing  their  steps  until  they  come  to  ''the  good 
way."  God  grant  that  the  Denominational  reader  for 
whom  this  chapter  has  been  especially  written,  may  be 
disposed,  by  the  operation  of  the  Holy  Spiiit,  to  heed 
the  Prophet's  injunction,  by  asking  for  ''  the  old  paths," 
'•  where  is  the  good  way  ?  "  and  having  found  it,  may  he 
walk  therein  and  find  rest  for  his  soul. 

"For  all  Thy  Church,  O  Lord,  we  intercede; 

Make  Thou  our  sad  divisions  soon  to  cease; 
Draw  us  the  nearer  each  to  each,  we  plead, 

By  drawing  all  to  Thee,  O  Prince  of  Peace. 
Thus  may  we  all  one  Bread,  one  Body,  be 

Through  Thy  blest  Sacrament  of  Unity. 

'*  We  pray  Thee,  too,  for  wanderers  from  Thy  fold ; 

Oh,  bring  them  back,  good  Shepherd  of  the  sheep, 
Back  to  the  Faith  which  Saints  believed  of  old, 

Back  to  the  Church  which  still  that  Faith  doth  keep. 
Soon  may  we  all  one  Bread,  one  Body,  be, 

Through  Thy  blest  Sacrament  of  Unity." 


The  Church  for  Ameficans. 


LECTURE  IV. 

THE  ynoTHER  cnURcri  or  England. 

I.     Continuity   of  the   English    Church. 
II.     Not   Originally   a    Mission   of   Rome. 
III.     Roman  Encroachments  and  Their  Resistance. 


(215) 


AUTHORITIES. 


Bright,  Early  English  Church  History. 
Bright,  Side  Waymarks  of  Church  History. 
CoiT,  Early  History  of  Christianity  in  England. 
Cox,  Is  the  Church  of  England  Protestant? 
Cole,  The  Anglican  Church. 
Fry,  Lectures  on  the  Church  of  England. 
Garnier,  Canon,  The  Title-deeds  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Hart,  Ecclesiastical  Records  of  England,  Ireland  and  Scotland. 
Jennings,  Ecclesia  Anglicana. 
Jennings,  A  Manual  of  Church  History.     (2  Vols.) 
Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History.     (2  Vols.) 
Lightfoot,  Bp.,  Leaders  in  the  Northern  Church. 
Perry,  Canon,  Students'  English  Church  History.    (3  Vols.) 
Pryce,  The  Ancient  British  Church. 
Robertson,  History  of  the  Christian  Church.    (8  Vols.) 
Ross-Lewin,  Continuity  of  the  English  Church. 
Sparks,  The  Resistance  of  the  English  Church  and  Nation  to  the 
Encroachments  and  Usurpations  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome. 
Stoughton,  Ecclesiastical  History  of  England.    (2  Vols.) 


PAMPHLETS. 

Garrett,  Bp.,  Historical  Continuity. 

Grueber,  The  Church  of  England  and  the  Ancient  Church  of  the 

land. 

LowRiE,  The  Mother  Church  of  England. 

Nye,  The  Story  of  the  Church  of  England. 

Nye,  The  Right  of  the  Church  of  England  to  Her  Property. 

Oldroyd,   The   Continuity   of   the    English    Church    Through 
Eighteen  Centuries. 


MISCELLANEOUS. 

Church  Club  Lectures,  The  Church  in  the  British  Isles. 
Church  Club  Lectures,  The  Church  in  the  British  Isles,  Post 
Restoration  Period. 


(216) 


The   Mother   Church   of 
England. 

WE  have  endeavored  to  show  elsewhere*  that  the 
Gospel  makes  identification  with  some  true 
branch  of  the  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ 
obligatory  upon  all.  It  is  now  necessary,  in  order  that 
the  way  may  be  prepared  for  determining  whether  or 
not  a  person  who  unites  with  the  American  Episcopal 
Church  fulfills  this  obligation,  to  devote  a  lecture  to  the 
Mother  Church  of  English-speaking  Christianity. 


I. 

CONTINUITY  OF    THE  ENGLISH  CHURCH. 

WE  shall  assume  that  all,  whether  they  be  repre- 
sentatives of  Romanism  or  of  Denomination- 
alism,  admit  that  the  Church  of  England,  be- 
fore the  Reformation,  was  a  part  of  the  true  Church  of 
Christ.  Certainly  she  was  the  only  form  of  organized 
Christianity  then  in  the  land.  It  is  equally  certain  that 
her  title  to  Catholicity  was  never  questioned  during  all 
of  the  pre-Reformation  ages.  The  impression,  however, 
prevails  that  the  Church  of  Rome  was  the  Church  in 
England  up  to  the  time  of  Henry  VIII.,  and  that  the 
present  religious  establishment  is  a  new  foundation. 

The  necessity  for  the  dissemination  of  knowledge  con- 
cerning the  origin  and  continuous  history  of  the  Mother 


♦Lectures  I  and  III. 


(217) 


218 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


i 


II 


Church  of  England,  is  illustrated  by  an  experience 
which  I  had  about  a  year  ago  upon  the  occasion  of  the 
holding  of  the  first  Service  in  one  of  the  many  large  towns 
of  Ohio  where,  as  the  General  Missionary  of  the  Diocese,  it 
has  been  my  duty  and  privilege  to  care  for  the  isolated 
and  neglected  members  of  the  Church  by  estabhshing 
Missions  or  occasional  Services.  At  this  place,  a  county- 
seat,  there  was  not  an  adherent  of  the  Church  to  be 
found,  and  so,  though  the  congi*egation  was  good  for  a 
stormy  evening,  and  the  Service,  considering  a  number 
of  adverse  circumstances,  was  as  satisfactory  as  could 
be  expected,  it  did  not  look  as  if  the  result  would  justify 
the  somewhat  unusual  expenditure  of  time,  money,  and 
energy  which  the  Service  had  cost.  It  was,  therefore,  a 
source  of  encouragement  and  gratification  to  me  when, 
as  the  congregation  was  disbanding,  a  middle-aged 
man  with  his  half  grown  son  lingered  to  thank  me  for 
the  Service,  and  to  request  permission  to  accompany 
me  to  the  hotel  for  some  conversation  about  *'vour 
Church.'' 

When  w©  reached  my  room  he  told  me  the  following 
interesting  story:  *'I  am  a  farmer  living  twelve  miles 
from  town.  I  saw  the  announcement  of  your  Service  in 
our  county  paper,  and,  having  lately  become  interested 
in  the  Eyjiscopal  Church,  my  son  and  I  have  driven  all 
the  way  through  the  rain  and  mud  to  attend  it.  I  have 
never  been  at  one  before,  partly,  because  there  has  been 
a  lack  of  convenient  opportunity,  and  partly,  because 
of  a  deep-rooted  prejudice  of  thirty  years'  standing 
against  that  Church.  In  times  past,  as  you  may  re- 
member, there  was  a  great  deal  more  of  controversy 
and  bigotry  about  matters  of  religion  than  there  is 
now.  The  members  of  the  rural  congregation  to  which 
I  belonged  would  have  gone  home  feeling  that  they  had 
not  received  their  money's  worth  unless  the  preacher 


CONTINUITY    OF    THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


219 


had  dwelt  at  some  length  upon  the  perfections  of  their 
sect  and  severely  criticised  its  numerous  rivals.    One  of 
the  ministers  who  stood  high  in  the  estimation  of  us 
all  for  learning,  because,  as  I  have  since  concluded,  he 
descanted  a  great  deal  concerning  matters  about  which 
neither  he  nor  his  auditors  knew  anything,  used  fre- 
quently to  go  out  of  his  way,  for  there  was  no  parish 
within  fifty  miles  of  the  place,  to  denounce  the  Episco- 
pal Church.    As  much  of  his  reputation  for  learning 
rested  upon  his  supposed  familiarity  with  history,  I  did 
not  question  his  representation  that  the  Mother  Church 
of  England  owed  its  existence  to  Henry  VIII.    From 
what  he  said  about  that  monarch  and  his  Ecclesiastical 
handiwork,  I  naturally  concluded  that  I  never  should  go 
across  the  road  to  attend  a  Church  which  had  such  an 
ignominious  origin  and  between  which  and  the  Church 
of  Rome  there  was  nothing  but  the  thinnest  and  flimsi- 
est paper  wall.    Though  I  have  since  frequently  spent 
more  or  less  time  in  a  city  where  you   have   many 
Churches,  and  though  there  has  for  years  been  a,  parish 
within  less  than  three  hours' drive,  the  resolution  formed 
so  long  ago  has  never  been  broken  until  this  evening. 
This   departure  from  a  life-long  course  is  accounted 
for  by  the  fact  that  a  much-beloved  relative,  who  has 
long  been  one  of  the  most  respected  ministers  of  the 
Denomination  to  which  I  belong,  to  the  astonishment 
of  everybody,  became  an  Episcopalian  a  few  weeks  ago. 
Shortly  after  seeing  the  announcement  of  the  change,  I 
received  a  copy  of  the  Prayer  Book  and  certain  publi- 
cations  containing   some   account   of    the   Episcopal 
Church,  and  answers   to   popular   objections   to   her. 
There  is,  of  course,  no  doubt  in  my  mind  as  to  whom  I 
am  indebted  for  them.    Under  the  circumstances  it  was 
natural  for  me  to  read  them  attentively  in  the  hope  of 
discovering  the  reason  for  my  friend's  unexpected  action. 


220 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


Even  the  cursory  examination  which  I  first  gave  the 
Prayer  Book  led  me  to  the  conclusion  that  it  was  a 
pretty  good  book,  even  if  Henry  VIII.  did  make  it. 
The  pamphlets  put  the  Episcopal  Church,  as  to  its 
origin,  history,  and  relationship  to  Rome  in  a  very  dif- 
ferent light  from  that  in  which  it  was  placed  by  the 
pulpit  orators,  from  whom  my  knowledge  of  Ecclesias- 
tical History  has  been  chiefly  derived.  After  reading 
them  I  went  back  to  the  Prayer  Book  and  have  read 
much  of  it  over,  and  over,  with  an  ever-increasing  sense 
of  the  beauty  of  its  Services— hence  my  desire  to  join  in 
their  public  use  as  I  have  had  the  privilege  of  doing  this 
evening.  And  now  I  have  a  favor  to  ask  of  you.  It  is 
that  you  will  outline  a  course  of  reading  in  the  history 
of  the  English  and  American  Episcopal  Churches,  and 
give  me  the  address  of  a  publisher  from  whom  the  books 
may  be  procured." 

It  need  hardly  be  said  that  this  request  was  readily 
complied  with.  The  next  thing  that  the  writer  heard  of 
the  man  was  from  the  Rector  of  the  nearest  Church.  He 
and  a  part  of  his  large  family  had  put  in  an  appearance 
on  a  Sunday  morning.  After  the  Service  he  made  him- 
self known  and  requested  that  he  and  his  house  might 
receive  preparation  for  Confirmation  at  the  Bishop's 
next  visitation.  All  the  family,  who  have  arrived  at 
the  years  of  discretion,  are  now  communicants  of  the 
Church.  Its  head  has  proved  to  be  a  veritable  mission- 
ary outside  of  his  own  household,  for  he  has  talked  to 
his  neighbors  about  the  Church,  and  distributed  broad- 
cast among  them  Prayer  Books  and  tracts.  So  suc- 
cessful has  he  been  that  the  community,  which,  owing  to 
the  recent  construction  of  a  railway  and  the  establish- 
ment of  a  station  for  its  convenience,  is  developing  into 
a  village,  has  determined  to  erect  a  Chapel  and  request 
the  Bishop  to  send  a  Oergyman  to  minister  to  them. 


CONTINUITY    OF    THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


221 


There  is,  indeed,  considerable  reason  for  the  wide- 
spread opinion  that  Henry  VIII.  founded  the  Church  of 
England.  Several  new  organizations  were  formed  dur- 
ing that  period.  And  so  many  changes  were  made  in 
her  government,  doctrine,  and  worship  as  to  make  it 
very  natural  for  people  generally  to  suppose  that  the 
Reformed  Church  of  England  was  simply  one  among 
the  new  organizations.  It  was  to  the  interest  of  the 
representatives  of  Romanism  on  the  one  hand,  and  of 
Denominationalism  on  the  other,  to  encourage  this  im- 
pression. Both  were  anxious  to  make  it  appear  that 
this  Church  is  a  creature  born  of  the  Reformation.  Ro- 
manists desired  this  because  it  could  then  be  shown 
that  so  far  as  historic  continuity  and  identity  with  the 
Church  that  our  Lord  founded  are  concerned,  we  are  no 
better  off  than  any  of  the  sects ;  and  Denominational- 
ists,  because  it  puts  our  Church  on  the  same  footing  with 
themselves.  This  accounts  for  the  fact  that  history,  as 
it  is  taught  in  our  common  schools,  often  does  us  fla- 
grant injustice.  The  author  has  heard  no  less  a  person- 
age than  the  principal  of  a  high  school,  w  ho  afterwards 
became  superintendent,  tell  his  pupils  that  Henry  VIII. 
founded  the  Episcopal  Church. 

Episcopalians  claim  that  the  present  Church  of  Eng- 
land is  identical  with  that  which  was  in  the  land  before 
the  Reformation.  The  changes  in  doctrine,  govern- 
ment, and  worship,  though  confessedly  great,  did  not 
necessarily  result  in  the  creation  of  a  new  Church.  This  is 
because  all  such  changes  were  merely  reformatory  and  so 
stopped  short  of  revolution.  "  I  know  that  some  people 
are  to  be  found,"  writes  Lord  Selborne,  *^who  pretend 
that  a  new^  Church  of  England  w^as  set  up  at  that  time, 
and  the  old  Church  cast  out.  For  that  pretense  there 
is  no  foundation  in  law  or  in  fact.  A  Church  doe6  not 
lose  its  identity  or  sameness,  as  an  organized  institution , 


99^ 


rWM   MOTHER   CHURCH    OF    ENGLAND. 


CONTINtJITY    OF   THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


223 


li 


if 

m 

i 


\ 


by  changes  in  form  or  ceremony.  In  the  English 
Reformation,  the  organization  of  the  Church,  as  the 
Church  of  England,  was  not  displaced  or  broken  at  any 
single  point.  And  I  think  it  right  to  add,  though  it  is 
not  my  object  to  enter  at  all  into  theological  questions, 
that  nothing  was  then  done  which  made  the  Church  of 
England  really  different  in  any  point  of  substance 
affecting  religious  faith  or  practice  from  what  it  had 
originally  been  in  the  days  of  Augustine,  the  first  Arch- 
bishop of  Canterbury." 

The  Reformation  left  the  Church  stripped  of  Roman 
bondage  and  corruptions,  but  this  only  rendered  her, 
in  all  important  respects,  what  she  had  been  before  the 
captivity,  an  independent,  pure  branch  of  the  Catholic 
Church  of  Christ.  "An  old  Gothic  tower,  founded  cen- 
turies ago,  might,  in  lapse  of  time,  be  so  overgrown  with 
ivy,  and  choked  with  rubbish,  as  to  have  all  its  original 
features  concealed.  If  the  ivy  were  pruned  away,  and 
the  rubbish  removed,  it  would  not  be  a  newly-founded 
tower,  but  the  old  one  restored.  But  if  the  proprietor 
should  build  a  new^  one  on  some  other  part  of  his  estate, 
digging  new  foundations  and  raising  new  walls,  this 
would  be  another  tower,  however  closely  it  might  re- 
semble the  old  one  in  its  outward  features."  The  point  of 
difference  between  the  Church  of  England  and  the  van- 
ous  Denominations  is  seen  in  the  fact  that  they  werenot 
even  in  existence  before  the  Reformation,  while  she  has 
come  dow  n  in  unbroken  continuity  from  the  Apostles. 
If,  in  an  evil  day,  the  United  States  should  become  tribu- 
tary to  some  foreign  power  from  which,  after  a  struggle 
of,  say,  three  hundred  years,  our  posterity  succeeded  in 
freeing  themselves,  and  if  they  then  returned  to  the  full 
constitutional  government  which  had  been  in  force  be- 
fore, and  never  more  than  partially  set  aside,  would  not 
the  nation,  at  the  end  of  the  three  centuries  of  subjuga- 


tion, be  historically  the  same  as  that  which  had  pre- 
viously existed?  If  so,  the  Church  of  England  was 
identically  the  same  after  the  Reformation  as  before. 

*'Out  of  Lake  Leman,"  as  our  poet  Bishop,  Coxe,  of 
Western  New  York,  puts  it, "comes the  'arrowy Rhone,' 
beautiful  as  light  from  the  clear  blue  sky.  You  may  have 
stood  on  the  little  promontory  where  the  Arve  issues 
forth  to  meet  it— a  red  torrent  from  the  Alps,  once  the 
crystal  of  melted  snows,  but  now  arrayed  like  a  Papal 
legate.  How  the  purer  river  writhes  and  refuses  to  be 
tainted !  How  the  red  rufiian  presses  and  pushes  it  to 
the  wall !  Still  the  Rhone  keeps  up  the  contest  as  best 
he  may.  For  a  time  he  holds  his  own,  but,  alas!  the 
red  wins,  and  the  sapphire  disappears.  What  is  visible 
to  the  common  eye  is  no  longer  the  blue  Rhone,  but 
only  the  blood-colored  Arve.  Is  the  nobler  river  lost? 
By  no  means.  It  becomes  the  Rhone  again,  and  rolls 
on  superbly,  through  the  broad  lands,  where  Irenseus 
planted  the  Gospel,  under  the  walls  of  Lyons  and  Aries, 
and  so  to  the  sea.  Behold  a  parable  that  illustrates 
the  Nicene  Church  in  England,  in  her  original  glory, 
and  in  her  restored  identity." 

That  the  contrast  between  the  Church  of  England,  im- 
mediately before,  and  after,  the  Reformation  did  not  nec- 
essarily interrupt  the  continuity  of  her  history,  has  been 
aptly  illustrated  by  the  celebrated  Dr.  Hook,  in  a  ser- 
mon preached  before  the  Royal  Family:  "About  two 
years  ago,"  said  he,  "the  very  Chapel  in  w^hich  we  are 
now  assembled  was  repaired,  certain  disfigurements  re- 
moved, certain  improvements  made.  Would  it  not  be 
absurd  on  that  account  to  contend  that  it  is  no  longer 
the  Chapel  Royal?  Would  it  not  be  still  more  absurd  if 
someone  were  to  build  a  new  Chapel  in  the  neighbor- 
hood, imitating  closely  what  this  Chapel  was  five  years 
ago,  and  carefully  piling  up  all  the  dust  and  rubbish 


224 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


which  was  at  that  time  swept  from  hence,  and  then  pro- 
nounce that,  not  this,  to  be  the  ancient  Chapel  of  the 
sovereigns  of  England?  The  absurdity  is  at  once  ap- 
parent ;  but  this  is  precisely  what  has  been  done  by  the 
Koman  Catholic  or  Papist.  The  present  Church  of 
England  is  the  old  Church  of  England  reformed  in  the 
reigns  of  Henry,  Edward,  and  Elizabeth,  of  certain  su- 
perstitious errors ;  it  is  the  same  Church  which  came 
down  from  our  British  and  Saxon  ancestors,  and,  as 
such,  it  possesses  its  original  endowments,  which  were 
never,  as  ignorant  persons  foolishly  suppose,  taken 
from  the  Church  and  given  to  another." 

This  point  has  been  illustrated  also  by  the  washed 
face  of  a  besmirched  coal  miner.  The  change  gives  the 
appearance  of  a  complete  transformation,  or  of  a  new 
creation  ;  and  yet  no  one  believes  that  the  identity  has 
been  changed.  ''I  make  not,"  says  Archbishop  Bram- 
hall,  A.  D.  1593-1663,  "the  least  doubt  in  the  world  but 
that  the  Church  of  England,  before  the  Keformation, 
and  the  Church  of  England,  after  the  Reformation,  are 
as  much  the  same  Church,  as  a  garden  before  it  is 
weeded,  and  after  it  is  weeded,  is  the  same  garden ; 
or  as  a  vine,  before  it  is  pruned,  and  after  it  is  pruned 
and  freed  fi-om  luxuriant  branches,  is  one  and  the  same 
vine."  "Be  it  known  to  all  the  world,"  said  Bishop 
Hall,  A.  D.  1574-1656,  "that  our  Church  is  only  re- 
formed or  repaired,  not  made  new— there  is  not  one 
stone  of  a  new  foundation  laid  by  us ;  yea,  the  old  walls 
stand  still." 


The  identity  of  the  Church  of  England,  which  has 
been  since  the  Reformation,  with  that  which  was  before, 
is  established  by  a  variety  of  considerations.  We  shall 
here  consider  five  of  them. 


CONTINUITY    OF   THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


225 


1.  In  all  essentials  of  Catholic  doctrine,  worship,  and 
government  there  was  no  change.  This  observation 
will,  according  to  our  design,  receive  full  proof  and  illus- 
tration in  other  connections.  We  shall,  for  the  present, 
do  no  more  than  simply  call  attention  to  the  fact  that 
our  Book  of  Common  Prayer  is  essentially  the  same  as 
that  which  had  been  in  use  from  the  earliest  times. 
During  the  Dark  Ages,  many  Roman  superstitions  and 
corruptions  crept  into  the  various  liturgical  "Uses." 
The  Reformers  eliminated  these.  The  first  Prayer 
Book  of  Edward  VI.,  a.  d.  1549,  was  mainly  a  simplifi- 
cation of  the  old  Service  Books,  translated  into  P]nglish, 
with  very  little  matter  added.  Indeed,  Cranrner  offered 
to  prove  to  all  comers  that  "the  Order,"  or,  as  we 
should  say,  the  Prayer  Book  of  the  Church  of  England, 
as  set  out  by  the  authority  of  King  Edward  VI.,  was 
the  same  as  had  been  used  in  the  Church  for  fifteen  hun- 
dred years  past— a  challenge  which  was  never  taken  up 
by  any  Roman  Catholic.  None  of  the  revisions  of  a.  d. 
1559,  1604,  or  1662  seriously  altered  the  character  im- 
pressed upon  the  English  Liturgy  from  the  first.  The 
Roman  Liturgy  was  never  used  in  England,  except  in 
some  monasteries  of  foreign  monks,  and  by  the  present 
Italian  schism  during  the  last  one  hundred  and  fifty 
years. 

2.  Those  who  effected  the  English  Reformation  did 
not  intend  to  abandon  the  old  Church  and  to  found  a  new 
one,  nor  did  it  even  occur  to  them  that  they  were  doing 
so,  in  casting  off'  the  Roman  yoke.  They  put  their  house 
in  order,  but  it  was  the  same  dwelling  after  as  before. 
Mr.  Gladstone  says :  ^'I  can  find  no  trace  of  that  opin- 
ion which  is  now  so  common  in  the  mouths  of  unthink- 
ing persons,  that  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  was 
abolished  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation,  and  that  a 
Protestant  Church  was  put  in  its  place,  nor  does  there 

C.  A.— 15 


226 


THE    MOTHER    CJtttfRCH    OF    ENGLAND. 


appear  to  have  been  so  much  as  a  doubt,  iu  the  mind  of 
any  one  of  the  Reformers,  whether  the  Church  legally 
established  in  Elngland  after  the  Reformation  was  the 
same  institution  with  the  Church  legally  established 
in  England  before  the  Reformation."  The  fact  that  the 
Roman  Church  was  never  by  any  Act  of  Parliament 
recognized  as  the  English  Church  and  that  the  Re- 
formed Church  has  always  been  so  regarded,  notwith- 
standing there  were  no  Acts  of  Establishment  passed 
in  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.  or  any  of  his  successors, 
is  in  itself  sufficient  conclusively  to  establish  the  claim 
of  Episcopalians  that  the  English  Reformers  did  not 
intend  to  organize  a  new  body,  and  that  the  Church 
of  England  after  the  Reformation,  was,  and  is,  in 
Mstory  and  in  law,  identically  the  same  which  was 
previously  the  Church  of  that  country. 

But  while  no  statute  can  be  cited  which  suggests 
that  any  new  organization  was  effected  at  the  Refor- 
mation, many  official  documents  of  that  period  plainly 
show  that  there  was  no  intention  of  breaking  the 
Church's  continuity.  For  example,  in  the  Preface  to 
the  First  Prayer  Book  of  Edward  VI.,  published  at 
the  very  crisis  of  the  Reformation,  we  find  this  state- 
ment: "The  Service  in  this  Church  of  England,  these 
many  years  hath  been  read  in  Latin  to  the  people." 
It  was  expressly  declared  in  an  Act  passed  in  the  year 
1533  that  "it  is  not  intended  to  force  the  Church 
of  England  into  an  uncatholic  position,  or  to  change 
its  character  as  a  sound  branch  of  Christ's  Holy 
Church."  And  when  Queen  Elizabeth  was  requested 
by  the.  German  Emperor  to  permit  the  Roman  Catho- 
lics to  set  up  an  independent  worship,  she  refused,  upon 
the  ground  that  "there  is  no  new  faith  propagated  in 
England,  no  rehgion  set  up  but  that  which  was  com- 
manded  by   our    Savior,   practiced  by  the  primitive 


CONTINUITY   OF   THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


227 


Church,  and  unanimously  approved  by  the  Fathers  of 
the  best  antiquity." 

In  freeing  herself  from  the  Roman  yoke  and  corrup- 
tions, the  Church  of  England  no  more  became  a  new 
Church,  than  she  did,  when,  after  centuries  of  liberty 
and  purity,  she  began  to  be  yoked  and  corrupted.  If 
the  casting  off  of  the  Papacy,  Indulgences,  Mariola- 
try,  and  the  like,  made  a  new  Church  in  England,  then 
the  imposition  of  them  upon  a  Church  that  was  cer- 
tainly wholly  free  of  them  for  five  centuries,  and  practic- 
ally so,  for  more  than  a  thousand  years,  must  have 
created  a  new  English  Church.  "  The  Anglican  Church," 
says  Bishop  Coxe,  "was  primitive  and  pure;  she  became 
enslaved  and  defiled;  she  regained  her  liberties,  she 
washed,  and  is  clean.  But  she  is  none  other  to-day,  as 
to  individualitv  and  identitv,  than  she  was  when  Ital- 
ians  were  sent  to  put  chains  upon  her ;  when  she  shook 
her  chains  in  defiance,  as  she  chafed  under  them;  when 
she  la,>*dowii  and  slept  awhile,  baffled  and  degraded ; 
or  when,  at  last,  she  woke  and  broke  from  her  fetters, 
and  began  to  be  herself  again ;  until  now,  God  has 
given  her  to  many  nations,  and  set  her  footsteps  in 
the  seas,  and  enabled  us  to  say,  'Her  sound  is  gone 
out  into  all  lands,  and  her  words  into  the  ends  of  the 
world.'" 

3.  Another  strong  evidence  of  the  historical  conti- 
nuity of  the  English  Church  is  afforded  by  the  fact  that 
there  was  no  transfer  of  property.  The  force  of  tb is  argu- 
ment will  be  felt  by  all.  If  the  Roman  Church  had  Ijeen 
the  Church  of  England  before  the  Reformation,  the  Ro- 
manists of  that  land  now  would  have,  at  least,  a  moral 
title  to  all  the  Church  property  that  had  been  accumu- 
lated up  to  the  time  of  Henry  VIII.  But  their  own 
English  Bishops  are  on  record  as  disclaiming  any 
right  whatsoever  to  such  property.    I  have  before  me  a 


228 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


eopy  of  a  very  interesting  document  entitled,  '*  Declara- 
tion of  the  Roman  Catholic  Bishops,  the  Vicars  Apos- 
tolic, and  their  Coadjutors  in  Great  Britain,"  the  ninth 
section  of  which  is  '*0n  the  claim  of  the  British  Catho- 
lics to  the  property  of  the  Church  established  in  Eng- 
land." It  runs  thus:  "British  Catholics  are  charged 
with  entertaining  a  pretended  right  to  the  property  of 
the  established  Church  in  England.  We  consider  such  a 
charge  to  be  totally  without  foundation.  We  declare 
that  we  entertain  no  pretension  to  such  a  claim.  We 
regard  all  the  revenues  and  temporalities  of  the  Church 
establishment  as  the  property  of  those  on  whom  they 
are  settled  by  the  laws  of  the  land.  We  disclaiui  any 
right,  title  or  pretension  with  regard  to  the  same." 
This  declaration  proves  that  even  the  Pope  and  his 
English  representatives  do  not  believe  that  the  Church 
of  Rome  was  the  Church  of  England  before  the  Reforma- 
tion, otherwise  there  would  be  no  such  article  in  their 
pronunciamento. 

It  has  also  been  decided  by  the  highest  Civil  Court  of 
England  that  Rome  has  no  title  to  English  Church  pro]3- 
erty.  A  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  years'  lease  of  a 
piece  of  land  to  be  used  for  military  purposes  was  given 
by  the  Church  to  the  Crown  in  a.  d.  872.  Upon  its  ex- 
piration some  twenty  years  ago,  it  was  adjudged  that, 
according  to  the  laws  of  the  realm,  "it  reverts  to  the 
original  owner,  the  party  that  gave  the  lease,  namely, 
the  Church  of  England."  This  lease  was  executed  over 
six  centuries  before  Henry  VIII.  was  born.  It  conclu- 
sively establishes  the  identity  of  the  Church  of  England 
in  the  reign  of  Queen  Victoria,  with  the  Church  which  ex- 
isted in  the  time  of  King  Alfred,  thus  witnessing  to  her 
continuous  organic  life  through  one  thousand  years 
of  history.  But  a  thousand  years,  long  as  the  stretch 
of  time  is,  far  transcending  the  grasp  of  imagination, 


CONTINUITY    OF    THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


229 


cover  but  little  over  half  of  the  Church's  existence  in 
England.  Planted  by  St.  Paul  or  St.  Joseph,  of  Arima- 
thea,  or  at  least  by  some  disciple  who  sat  at  the  feet  of 
the  beloved  St.  John,  she  has  come  down  through  the 
British,  the  Anglo-Saxon,  the  Norman,  the  Mediaeval, 
the  Reformation,  and  the  Revolution  periods  to  the 
present,  looking  ^'  forth  as  the  morning,  fair  as  the 
moon,  clear  as  the  sun,  and  terrible  as  an  army  with 
banners." 

It  is  worthy  of  note,  in  passing,  that  the  property  at 
present  possessed  by  the  Church  of  England,  speaking 
broadly,  was  given  her  before  the  Norman  Conquest,  a. 
D.  1066,  or  since  the  Reformation.  The  influence  of 
Rome  was  but  little  greater  in  the  first  of  these  periods 
than  it  has  been  in  the  second. 

4.  The  name  of  the  Church  after  the  Reformation  is 
the  same  as  before,  Ecclesia  Anglicaim,  the  Church  of 
England.  If  the  Church  of  Rome  had  been  the  Church  of 
England  until  the  reign  of  Henry  VIII.,  the  name  would 
have  borne  w itness  to  it,  and  would  have  been  neces- 
sarily changed,  but,  as  it  is,  the  unchanged  name  bears 
strong  testimony  to  the  identity  of  the  present  Church 
of  England  with  that  which  was  before  the  Reformation. 

5.  But  a  most  conclusive  evidence  of  the  identity  of 
the  present  Church  of  England  with  that  of  the  pre-Re- 
formation  period,  is  the  fact  that  the  whole  nation,  with 
scarcely  a  dissenting  voice,  consented  to  the  changes 
w^hich  terminated  the  usurped  jurisdiction  of  the  Pope 
in  England,  and  restored  to  the  Crown  its  ancient  au- 
thority over  both  the  temporal  and  spiritual  estates  of 
the  realm.  It  is  popularly  and  erroneously  supposed 
that  there  would  have  been  no  Reformation  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church,  but  for  the  iniquitous  matrimonial  projects 
of  Henry  VIII.,  the  consummation  of  which  made  neces- 
sary the  repudiation  of  the  Roman  supremacy.    As  a 


230 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


matter  of  fact,  however,  nothing  can  be  more  confidently 
predicated  than  that  the  Reformation  of  England  would 
have  taken  place  very  much  as  it  did,  and  at  about  the 
same  time,  even  if  the  King  had  seen  fit  to  resist,  rather 
than  abet  it.  "Revolutions  which  shake  the  deepest 
foundations  of  society,  and  destroy  old  forms  of  belief ; 
reformations  for  which  a  world  is  anxiously  looking,  do 
not  take  their  rise  from  the  will  of  a  single  individual. 
They  are  the  slow  growth  of  time,  the  outcome  and 
final  result  of  centuries  of  forgetfulness  of  duty,  and  of 
infinite  and  wide-spread  mismanagement.  It  is  as  great 
a  folly  to  attribute  the  English  Reformation  to  the  w  ill 
of  Henry,  as  to  ascribe  the  gradual  and  necessary  prog- 
ress of  the  Papacy  wholly  to  the  False  Decretals,  or  to 
assert  that  the  French  Revolution  sprang  from  a  single 
cause.  At  the  time  of  Henry's  accession,  the  Reforma- 
tion was  already  in  existence,  silently  working  and  fer- 
menting in  the  minds  of  all  men.  Any  occasion  might 
give  it  birth ;  at  any  moment  any  individual — a  monk 
in  Germany,  or  a  King  in  England  —  might  call  it 
forth,  and  clothe  it  with  a  shape  and  a  name."  Henry 
Vni.  was  therefore,  in  reality,  but  the  gilded  hand 
on  the  outside  of  the  dial — the  hour  to  strike  was 
determined  by  the  obscure  but  weighty  movements 
within. 

There  had  been  a  time  when  the  Roman  swav  was, 
upon  the  whole,  beneficial  to  England,  but  that  time 
had  passed.  Adam  Smith  goes  none  too  far  when  he 
says:  '* During  the  tenth,  eleventh,  twelfth,  and  thir- 
teenth centuries,  and  for  some  time  before  and  after 
that  period  "  [that  is  to  say,  during  the  time  of  Papal 
domination  in  England]  ''the  constitution  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  may  be  considered  as  the  most  formid- 
able combination  that  was  ever  formed  against  the 
authority  and  security  of  civil  government,  as  well  as 


CONTINUITY    OF    THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


231 


against  the  liberty,  happiness,  and  reason  of  mankind." 
"In  nearly  every  way,"  says  Dean  Farrar,  "material 
and  moral,  the  Papacy  was  a  curse  to  England." 

Their  novel  Courts  of  Appeal,  and  the  usurped  power 
of  appointing  to  vacant  Bishoprics  and  benefices, 
enabled  the  Popes  at  will  effectually  to  resist  the  con- 
stitutional legal  machinery ;  to  introduce  innumerable 
corrupting  agencies,  and  more  and  more  to  gratify  their 
insatiable  greed  for  money  by  a  system  of  extortion  so 
stupendous  and  unconscionable,  as  really  to  amount  to 
wholesale  robbery,  the  like  of  which  the  world  perhaps 
never  witnessed  before  or  since.  Some  faint  idea  of  the 
extent  of  that  stream  of  gold  which,  during  the  Dark 
Ages,  flowed  to  Rome  from  England,  may  be  gathered 
from  the  recorded  complaint  of  the  House  of  Commons, 
made  as  early  as  the  year  a.  d.  1376.  It  was  main- 
tained on  the  floor  of  the  house  that  "  the  sums  paid  to 
the  Pope  by  those  alone,  who  were  indebted  to  him  for 
Ecclesiastical  preferment,  amounted  to  five  times  as 
much  as  the  taxes  of  the  whole  realm,  which  accrued  to 
His  Majesty,  the  King,  and  that  there  was  no  monarch 
in  Christendom  so  rich  as  to  possess  the  fourth  part  of 
the  treasure  which  was  annually  exported  from  Eng- 
land to  Rome."  Bishop  Grey,  who  was  translated  from 
Winchesfyer  to  York  in  a.  d.  1215,  was  compelled  to  pay 
to  the  Pope,  for  receiving  the  pall,  a  sum  equivalent  to 
fifty  thousand  dollars  of  our  money.  In  the  light  of 
this,  how  ridiculous  it  would  be  were  the  Pope  to  make 
any  serious  claim  to  the  property  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. He  impoverished  our  Mother  Church,  but  did 
not  put  so  much  as  a  penny  into  her  endowments  and 
buildings.  The  money  that  went  to  Rome  would  have 
built  and  endowed  a  hundred  cathedrals  and  colleges, 
but  that  which  came  from  thence  would  not  have  kept  a 
single  Italian  monk  from  starvation. 


mm'  THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

The  people  generally  had  loug  been  convinced  that 
things  could  not  always  go  on  in  this  way.  And  it  is  a 
great,  though  strangely  prevalent,  mistake,  to  suppose 
that  Henry  VIII.  was  the  first  to  take  steps  for  the  pur- 
pose of  curbing  the  rapacity  of  the  Roman  potentate. 
Nothing  could  be  wider  from  the  truth.  Indeed,  so 
accustomed  were  the  people  to  struggle  against  the  en- 
croachments of  the  Papacy,  and  so  many  were  the  laws 
which  they  had  in  different  ages  enacted  for  their  self- 
defense,  that,  when  Henry  VIII.  found  it  convenient  for 
more  reasons  than  the  one  usually  assigned,  to  exercise, 
even  in  Ecclesiastical  affairs,  the  prerogative  of  ruling 
his  Kingdom  without  interference  from  the  Pontiif— a 
prerogative  which  the  gi-eat  majority  of  his  predecessors 
had  exercised— he  had  but  little  to  do  beyond  the  en- 
forcement of  long-existing  laws. 

The  proof  of  all  this  is  admirably  set  forth  by  Dr. 
Ingram,  a  London  barrister,  in  his  excellent  volume, 
entitled  *' England  and  Rome,  A  History  of  the  Rela- 
tions Between  the  Papacy  and  the  English  State  and 
Church,  from  the  Norman  Conquest  to  the  Revolution 
in  1668."  After  a  most  scholarly  and  exhaustive 
presentation  of  the  whole  subject  in  the  light  of  full 
quotations  from  the  statutes  of  the  realm,  it  is  asked  : 
*'  What  Ecclesiastical  jurisdiction  did  the  Pope  possess 
in  England  at  the  accession  of  Henry  VII.  in  1485," 
that  is,  thirty-two  years  before  Luther  commenced  his 
reformatory  work,  and  fifty-seven  years  before  Henry 
yill.  broke  with  Clement  VII.?  The  answer  to  this  ques- 
tion is  to  the  effect  that  the  Pope  was  possessed  of  no 
such  jurisdiction  whatsoever.  "  The  Pope  could  not  ap- 
point, translate,  suspend,  or  depose  a  Bishop,  or  regu- 
lar Prelate  in  England.  He  could  not  appoint  to  an 
English  prebend  or  benefice;  and  every  Englishman  who 
accepted  a  preferment  at  home  from  the  Pope,  without 


CONTINUITY   OP   THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH. 


233 


the  King's  leave,  was  liable  to  banishment  and  forfeiture 
of  all  his  property.  A  Papal  excommunication  of  itself, 
had  not  the  slightest  effect  in  England.  No  one  could 
receive,  read,  or  publish  such  a  document,  or  any  other 
Papal  sentence  or  process  without  leave  of  the  King." 

It  may  be  conceded  that  the  Popes,  during  several 
reigns,  practically'-  ruled,  and  grievously  spoiled,  the 
Church  of  England,  notwithstanding  the  laws  of  the 
realm.  But  it  should  be  remembered  that  they  were 
permitted  to  do  this  by  the  Kings  who  found  it  to  their 
real  or  imaginary  political  interest  to  be  on  friendly 
terms  with  so  great  a  potentate.  Not  one  of  them  since 
the  Plantagenets,  had  possessed  a  strictly  legitimate 
claim  to  the  crown,  and  they  needed  the  support  of 
Rome  to  prop  up  their  thrones.  Though  the  people 
were  exceedingly  long  suffering,  yet  their  spoliations 
and  wrongs  sometimes  became  intolerable.  At  such 
times  they  not  infrequently  offered  effectual  protest. 
The  forcing  of  the  Magna  Charta  from  the  despicable 
John  in  the  year  1215,  is  an  illustration  in  point.  This 
celebrated  document  provided  both  in  its  opening  and 
closing  sentences  for  the  recognition  and  restoration  of 
the  ancient  liberty  of  the  Church  to  govern  itself. 

As  we  approach  the  Reformation,  we  find  the  nation 
growing  more  and  more  impatient  of  Papal  interfer- 
ences and  exactions.  This  accounts  for  the  phenomenal 
success  of  Henry  VIII.  in  freeing  himself  and  people 
from  the  Roman  grasp.  Romanists  and  Denomina- 
tionalists  have  joined  hands  in  efforts  to  make  it  ap- 
pear that  this  self-willed  and  burly  King  so  intimidated 
his  cowering  subjects  that  they  espoused  his  cause 
against  the  Pope,  notwithstanding  their  sympathies 
and  prayers  were  with  *'His  Holiness."  This  view  is 
contrary  to  the  witness  of  all  trustworthy  contempora- 
ries who  have  left  on  record  their  impressions  concerning 


234 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


the  temper  of  the  people.  Even  Bishop  Gardiner,  who 
in  the  next  reign  opposed  the  Reformation,  and  suf- 
fered five  years'  imprisonment  in  the  Tower  of  London, 
and  was  made  Lord  Chancellor  by  "Bloody"  Mary, 
tells  us:  "All  who  have  been  boi'n  and  reared  in  Eng- 
land, learned  and  unlearned,  men  and  women,  are 
agreed  upon  this  point  that  they  have  naught  to  do 
with  Rome."  And  a  correspondent  of  Cardinal  Pole 
writes:  "One  thing  yet  resteth  that  I  thought  conven- 
ient to  advertise  you  of  wherein  I  do  perceive  ye  be 
ignorant,  which  is  this:  Ye  write  in  one  part  of  your 
book  that  ye  think  the  hearts  of  the  subjects  of  this 
realm  greatly  offended  with  abolishing  of  the  Bishop  of 
Rome's  usurped  authority  in  this  realm,  as  if  all  the 
people,  or  most  part  of  them,  took  the  matter  as  ye  do. 
Wherein  I  do  answer  ye  be  deceived.  If,  at  this  day,  the 
King's  grace  would  go  about  to  renew  in  his  realm  the 
said  abolished  authority  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  I  think 
he  should  find  much  more  difficulty  to  bring  it  about  in 
his  Parliament,  and  to  induce  his  people  to  agree  there- 
unto, than  anything  that  ever  he  proposed  in  his  Par- 
liament since  his  first  reign."  Dr.  Ingram  says:  "It  is 
even  absurd  to  speak  of  the  existence  of  coercion  at  a 
time  when  the  King,  the  two  Universities,  the  two  Con- 
vocations, all  the  Monasteries,  Colleges,  Chapters,  and 
Hospitals  in  the  Kingdom,  and  the  two  Houses  of  Par- 
liament were  of  the  same  mind . " 

Thus,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  Reformation 
would  have  come  about  in  England  some  time  in  the 
course  of  the  sixteenth  century,  when  it  was  taking 
place  in  all  the  surrounding  nations,  even  if  Henry  VIII. 
had  been  content  to  retain  Catherine  of  Aragon  as  his 
wife.  So  unanimously  resolved  upon  casting  off  the 
Papal  yoke  were  the  people,  that  of  all  their  represen- 
tatives at  Parliament,  only  one  Bishop,  Fisher,  and  one 


CONTINUITY   OF   THE    ENGLISH   CHURCH. 


235 


Layman  of  note.  Sir  Thomas  More,  voted  against  the 
various  constitutional  legislative  acts  which  terminated 
the  already  illegal  Papal  tyranny  and  robbery  in  Eng- 
land. Of  the  nine  thousand  eight  hundred  Clergy,  only 
one  hundred  and  eighty-six  refused  to  assent  to  the  Re- 
formed Offices  in  a.  d.  1559.  Investigation  would 
doubtless  show  that  most  of  these  were  foreign  intrud- 
ers. And  when  the  Nation  and  Church,  at  the  accession 
of  Elizabeth,  finally  and  forever  repudiated  the  usurped 
authority  of  the  Pope,  only  one  hundred  and  ninety- 
two  out  of  more  than  nine  thousand  Clergymen  refused 
to  subscribe  to  the  Prayer  Book,  and  only  eighty  of 
these  were  Rectors  of  Churches. 

This  unanimity  puts  the  identity  and  continuity  ot 
the  present  Church  of  England  with  that  which  was  be- 
fore the  Reformation  beyond  the  possibility  of  doubt. 
The  whole  nation,  not  excepting  even  Fisher  and  More, 
for  they  did  not  withdraw  from  the  Church,  belonged  to 
it  after  the  repudiation  of  the  l*ope's  authority  as  they 
had  done  before.  It  was,  therefore,  the  same  Church 
minus  the  unconstitutional  interferences  of  the  Papacy. 
During  long  centuries  of  her  early  history,  the  Church  of 
England,  notwithstanding  her  independence  of  Roman 
authority,  had  flourished  and  been  universally  recog- 
nized as  a  true  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ ; 
and  now  that  she  has  regained  her  ancient  liberty  and 
purity,  she  is  unquestionably  the  same  Church  that  she 
was  before  and  during  tlie  period  of  her  captivity  and 
corruption— the  Church  of  England  in  unbroken  con- 
tinuity from  the  time  of  Archbishop  Theodore,  who 
about  the  year  670  consoHdated  the  various  Churches 
of  the  Heptarchy  into  one  National  Church,  the  Mother 
of  English-speaking  Christianity,  the  rock  from  which 
the  American  Episcopal  Church  is  hewn. 


I 


I 


ii 


n. 

NOT  ORIGINALLY  A  MISSION  OF  ROME, 

MANY  of  the  filets  produced  inproof  of  the  identity 
of  the  present  Church  of  England  with  the 
Church  of  that  country  before  the  Reformation, 
also  prove  that  the  Church  of  Rome  was  not  the  un- 
reformed  Church  of  England.  Unless,  indeed,  that  for 
which  we  have  been  contending  be  a  fiction,  the  very 
fact  that  the  present  Church  of  England  is  not  the 
Church  of  Rome  proves  that  she  never  was  such.  For  if 
this  had  ever  been  the  case,  it  must  still  be  so,  or  else 
the  identity  of  which  we  have  spoken  does  not  exist.  In 
establishing  the  historical  continuity  of  the  Mother 
Church,  we  have,  therefore,  necessarily  established  her 
constitutional  independence  of  Rome;  nevertheless,  it 
will  be  well  to  make  this  appear  from  other  points  of 
view. 

That  the  Church  of  England  up  to  the  Reformation 
was  not,  as  Ultramontanists  represent,  simply  a  branch 
of  the  Church  of  Rome  is  evident  from  her  origin.  Just 
when,  and  by  whom,  the  Church  was  planted  in  England, 
can  probably  never  be  satisfactorily  determined.  *'  We 
see  the  light  of  the  Word  shined  here,  but  see  not  who 
kindled  it."  But  that  it  was  very  early  and  not  by  the 
Roman  Church  is  certain.  One  tradition  to  which  many 
learned  men  have  been  inclined  to  give  credence,  tells  us 
that  St.  Paul,  himself,  preached  in  Britain.  That  he 
visited  Northern  Europe  seems  more  than  probable 
from  his  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  where  he  expresses  his 
intention  of  taking  a  missionary  journey  into  Spain. 

(236)  ^ 


Jeru 


KALEM 


'*  The  Mother  of  all  the  Churches 


Rome 

T 


fiiPHESUS 

Gaul 

~r- 

Britain 


1 


S.Paul  and  oniKiis 


J 


Gregory 


Cornwall  350 


Wales 

CuMrtKJA  400 


HONORIUS 


Ireland  441 


Max  t47    ' 


Scotland  e565 


Kent  597 


E.  An(;lia  631 


NORTHI  MBRIA  835 


Whsnkx  634  I 

Mercia  653 


Essex  654 


SrccKssioN 

OF  J^iMTisH 

Bishops 

IN  TIL  THE 
CHlKCir    WAN 
FIN  ALLY   DJilVKN 

INTO  Wales, 
A.  D.  587. 


Sussex  68L 

ent  SHJSS:  '&'?eV?yirilIi^?Se's^\^^^^^^^^  Chnrch  to  have  been  Independ- 
of  England,  and  the  blacrtype  a"^^^^^  of  the  present  Church 

results  of  the  Roman  MlBsfoVifl  Tw^t^  °*^.  ®i*^®  appearance  and  meaeer 
the  Anglo-Saxorconquerirs  of  NSrt'kumbrif  Mfrrf/r^'^  the  converSof 
the  part  taken  by  them  in  theconversio^nf  i?;^®5^^^^^^  »'*<*  Sussex;  and 

compared  wi  th  that  taken  by  thS  nit  ?2  Bri^f«h  'phf^l  ^k°«^"?  *°<*  Wessex  is  as 
In  the  case  of  Kent.  ^  "^®  British  Church  unimportant,  except 


NOT   ORIGINALLY    A    MISSION    OF    ROME. 


237 


Thence  he  might  easily  have  sailed  to  England.  Clem- 
ent, of  Rome,  a  disciple  of  St.  Paul,  and  mentioned  with 
commendation  by  him  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Corinthi- 
ans, about  A.  D.  95,  thirty  yeai^  after  the  death  of  the 
Apostle  says  that  in  preaching  the  Gospel,  St.  Paul 
"  went  to  the  utmost  bounds  of  the  West."  Now  this  ex- 
pression, "  the  utmost  bounds  of  the  West,"  is  the  epithet 
that  the  ancients  ordinarily  used  in  speaking  of  the 
British  Isles  which  composed  the  principal  and  alto- 
gether the  best-known  part  of  the  most  western ly  por- 
tions of  the  land  that  appeared  on  the  maps  during  the 
first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  Eusebius,  a.  d.  325, 
says  that  one  of  the  Apostles  "visited  the  British  Isles," 
and  Theodoret,  about  a  century  later,  mentions  Britain 
as  one  place  where  St.  Paul  labored.  Hore  concludes 
his  scholarly  summing  up  of  the  authorities  with  the  re- 
mark: "There  can  be  no  reasonable  ground  for  doubt- 
ing that  the  British  Church  was  not  only  of  very  ancient, 
but  also  of  Apostolic  foundation." 

There  are  some  ten  traditions  respecting  the  plant- 
ing of  Christianity  in  Britain.  It  would  be  a  grave 
error  to  consider  them  as  altogether  worthless  because 
they  are  not  a  certain  source  of  knowledge.  "  One  lead- 
ing idea  seems  to  underlie  them  all  alike,  that  the  Gos- 
pel was  preached  in  Britain  at  an  early  date,  but  that 
this  was  effected  by  different  and  independent  agencies, 
at  different  times,  from  different  places,  and  at  different 
points  in  the  Island." 

That  the  early  Church  of  Britain  was  not  a  Roman 
Mission  is  certain.  For  when  in  a.  d.  597  the  Bishop  of 
Rome  sent  Augustine  with  a  band  of  missionaries  to 
the  Island,  they  found  an  ancient,  regularly  organized 
Church.  As  Thomas  Fuller  quaintly  expresses  it :  "  Re- 
ligion came  into  Britain,  not  by  the  semi-circle  of  Rome, 
but  in  a  direct  line  from  the  Asiatic  Churches."    The 


238 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OP  ENGLAND. 


celebrated  jurist,  Blaekstone,  says:  " The  ancient  Brit- 
ish Church,  by  whomsoever  planted,  was  a  stranprer  to 
the  Bishop  of  Rome,  and  all  his  pretended  authority." 
The  difference  between  the  two  Churches  in  matters  of 
ceremony,  which  soon  became  a  source  of  contention, 
also  shows  that  the  native  Church  was  not  one  of  Ro- 
man orio;in.  Evidence  to  this  effect  still  exists.  All  the 
Enc;;liHh  Cathedrals  and  old  Churches  were  built  with  the 
Chancel  to  the  East,  and  the  main  entrance  at  the  West. 
No  such  universal  resi>ect  was  paid  to  the  points  of  the 
compass  in  Ultramontane  countries.  Rome  had  no 
Trinity  Sunday  in  her  Ecclesiastical  year  before  the  end 
of  the  fourteenth  century,  and  she  still  names  the  Sun- 
days following  Pentecost  until  Advent  after  that  Festi- 
val, whereas  we  name  them  after  the  feast  of  the 
adorable  Trinity.  This  was  the  case  before  the  Refor- 
mation, as  may  be  seen  by  reference  to  the  Old  Sarum 
Missal,  for  example,  '*The  10th  Sunday  after  the  Feast 
of  the  Holy  Trinity."  Tluis,  as  long  as  one  stone 
remains  upon  another,  and  while  we  adhere  to  our  re- 
spective Liturgies,  there  will  remain  monumental  and 
documentary  witnesses  of  great  antiquity  and  worth 
to  the  independent  origin  of  the  English  Church. 

It  has  often  been  represented  that  the  original  Celtic 
population,  and  with  it  tlie  native  Church  of  Britain, 
were  all  but  annihilated  by  the  Angles  and  Saxons,  who 
in  the  fifth  and  sixth  centuries  frequently  invaded  the 
Island  and  eventually  conquered  the  greater  part  of  it, 
and  that  the  Roman  Mission  was  so  successful  in  the 
conversion  of  the  new  inhabitants  that  the  date  of  its 
establishment  may  properly  be  reckoned  as  the  begin- 
ning of  the  present  Church  of  England.  If  this  represen- 
tation were  true,  we,  as  members  of  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion, would  have  no  interest  to  serve  by  calling  it  in 


NOT   ORIGINALLY    A    MISSION    OF    ROME. 


239 


question.  For  it  would  be  an  honorable  origin  for  our 
Mother  Church.  During  the  first  six  or  eight  centuries, 
the  Church  of  Rome  was  as  pure  a  branch  of  the  Catho- 
lic Church  as  any  on  earth.  But  even  if  Christianity 
had  been  planted  in  England  by  Rome,  her  pretended 
right  to  be  called  the  Church  of  England  to  the  time  of 
the  Reformation,  could  not  possibly  be  established. 
The  argument  from  which  it  might  appear  to  the  unre- 
flecting that  such  a  claim  had  been  made  good,  would 
prove  quite  too  much  to  the  thoughtful,  namely,  that 
the  Church  of  Rome  and  Italy  should  be  subject  to  the 
Church  of  Jerusalem  and  Palestine. 

But  the  representation  is  not  true.  The  native 
Church  was  not  annihilated.  We  read  that  numerous 
Synods  of  the  Welsh  Bishops  were  held  during  the  sixth 
century,  at  some  of  which  there  were  as  many  as  one 
hundred  and  nineteen  Bishops  present;  this  number 
being  doubtless  made  up  chiefly  of  abbots,  monastic 
Bishops,  and  the  Bishops  driven  thither  from  English 
Sees.  The  most  important  of  these  Church  assemblies 
were  held  at  Brevi,  near  Lampeter,  a.  d.  569,  and  Lucus 
Victorae,  a.  d.  570,  both  presided  ovei  by  St.  David, 
who  had  been  consecrated  Bishop  by  the  Patriarch 
of  Jerusalem,  thus  adding  an  independent  strand  in 
our  Apostolic  Succession. 

Nor  was  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  con- 
querors due  to  the  Roman  Mission  in  any  such  degree  as 
is  popularly  supposed.  As  Mr.  Gladstone  says:  *'  It  was 
not  by  the  action  of  Rome  that  the  whole  of  England 
was  converted.  A  very  large  portion  of  England  was 
converted,  not  by  the  action  of  the  Roman  missionaries, 
but  from  the  North.''  Christianity  was  really  restored 
to  fully  nine-tenths  of  the  Island  by  missionaries,  who 
either  went  out  or  received  their  inspiration  from  the 
ancient  Celtic  Monasteries  of  lona  and  Lindisfarne.  To 


It 


,HE  MOTHKB  CHURCH  OF   1«HO..ANP. 


St.  Aidan.founder  of  Ae  latter^"  oHvangelizing  the 
tine,  rightfully  ^^;gX  nlsiouaries  did  not  suc- 
Anglo-Saxons.    The  'ome  church  beyond  the 

^  in  Pe-anently  P  an^^  t^«  ^.^  ,.,i,i,,,  of  the 
Kingdom  of  Kent^  The  rema^      y         ^^^^.^^ 
Heptarchy  were  Chnstiamzed  ^J  the:-elative8izeof  the 

aries.  W^^«'""^T;„.ustte  and  Aidan  were  vespect- 
territories  of  which  ^f^^J-^  that  to  the  foreigner 
ively  the  apostles,  7!.  ^^^  ^^.-esented  by  the  portion 

missionaries.  eonversion  of  Kent  is  by 

And  even  the  credit  ^ovt^^^^     Augustine  found  a 

no  means  wholly  due  t^.   ^°"';  ^^e  Queen,  who  was  a 

;owerful  and  indispensab^^^^^^^^ 

Galilean,  that  is,  f^"'",,,,it,h  the  monks,  the  credit  of 
nmst  at  least  «hare  equally  ;^^;^^^,fu,  wholesale  Bap- 
the  King's  Conversion  and  thew  ^^^^ 

tism  of  the  little  k^gdo'"  vvh  ^^^   Canterbury  Chapel. 

their  work  of  e\^"g«^f  J^X^ed  that  "next  to  God 
Pope  Gregory  ^^'"^f.  7^  for  its  conversion. ''' 
England  was  indebt^  to  B^^^^^^^^^  ^^^^^^  ^^^  te 

The  words  of  the  ^0^°""    >       ^  Durham,  and  his 
historian,  LigMfoot   ^-^J^'Zte.man  and   author, 
quotation  from  the    ''J™'"     „„     confirm  our  repre- 
iontalembert,  a  ^^'"f/l  ^^*^^^^^^^^ 
mentation  in  jX^i^^  compart  with  native  Mis- 
the  labors  of  tl»«^*°J^.'^  .  „  ^f  the  Celtic  Evangehsts, 
sionaries.    "Of  the tmmP^«  f;j3,  ^,  «aid  already. 

X  li?rknt  trs2:it  of  th^r  success  it  is  soon 


•  See  Frontispiece. 


BRITISH  CHURCH 
CELTIC  MISSIONS 
ITALIAN  MISSIONS 


6th  &  7th  Centimes. 


Map,  showing  the  parts  taken  respectively  by  the  native  and  Roman  Mis- 
sionaries in  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxons. 


1'  ' 


I. 


NOT    ORIGINALLY   A    MISSION    OF    ROME. 


241 


told.  It  was  the  power  of  earnest,  simple,  self-denying 
lives,  pleading  with  a  force  which  no  eloquence  of  words 
can  command.  But,  whatever  may  be  the  explanation, 
the  fact  remains.  lona  succeeded  where  Rome  had 
failed."  "From  the  cloisters  of  Lindisfarne,"  writes 
Montalembert,  "  and  from  the  heart  of  those  districts 
in  which  the  popularity  of  ascetic  Pontiffs,  such  as 
Aidan  and  martyr  kings,  such  as  Oswald  and  Oswin, 
took  day  by  day  a  deeper  root,  Northumbrian  Chris- 
tianity spread  over  the  southern  Kingdoms.  What  is 
distinctly  visible  is  the  influence  of  the  Celtic  Priests 
and  missionaries  everywhere  replacing  and  seconding 
Roman  missionaries,  and  reaching  districts  where  their 
predecessors  had  never  been  able  to  enter.  The  stream 
of  the  Divine  Word  thus  extended  itself  from  North  to 
South,  audits  slow  but  certain  course  reached  in  succes- 
sion  all  the  people  of  the  Heptarchy.  Of  the  eight 
Kingdoms  of  Anglo-Saxon  confederation,  that  of  Kent 
alone  was  exclusively  won  and  retained  by  the  Roman 
monks,  whose  first  attempts  among  the  East  Saxons 
and  Northumbrians  ended  in  failure.  In  Wessex  and  in 
East  Anglia,  the  Saxons  of  the  West  and  Angles  of  the 
East  were  converted  by  the  combined  action  of  conti- 
nental missionaries  and  Celtic  monks.  As  to  the  two 
Northumbrian  Kingdoms,  and  those  of  Essex  and  Mer- 
cia,  which  comprehended  in  themselves  more  than  two 
thirds  of  the  territory  occupied  by  the  German  con- 
querors, these  four  counties  owed  their  final  conversion 
exclusively  to  the  peaceful  invasion  of  Celtic  monks,  who 
not  only  rivaled  the  zeal  of  the  Roman  monks,  but 
who,  the  first  obstacles  surmounted,  showed  much  more 
perseverance,  and  gained  much  more  success.  Sussex 
still  remained  heathen ;  Sussex,  the  smallest  of  all  but 
one  of  the  earliest  founded ;  Sussex,  the  immediate  neigh- 
bors of  the  Roman  missionaries  in  Kent ;  Sussex  was  at 

C.  A.— 16 


242 


THE  MOTHEB  CHUECH  OF  ENGLAKD. 


i 


I 


last  stormed  and  taken.  And  here  again  the  conqueror 
of  this  last  stronghold  of  heathendom,  though  an 
ardent  champion  of  the  Roman  cause,  was  a  Northum- 
brian by  birth.  Wilfrid  had  been  a  pupil  of  Aidau,  and 
his  missionary  inspiration  was  drawn  from  Lindis- 
farne." 


III. 

MOWAM  MMCmACStMENTS  AND  THEIR  RESISTANCE. 

BUT  it  is  said  that,  however  it  may  be  in  regard  to 
the  planting  of  the  Church  among  the  Britains 
and  the  conversion  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  conquer- 
ors, the  fact  remains  that  from. a.  d.  596,  to  the  Refor- 
mation, the  headship  of  the  Pope  was  as  fully  recog- 
nized in  England  as  in  the  See  of  Rome.  We  have 
already  had  repeated  occasions  to  show  the  utt^r  base- 
lessness of  this  pretension,  but  inasmuch  as  reitera- 
tion is  necessary  to  remove  the  effect  of  inherited  mis- 
conceptions, especially  when,  as  in  this  case,  they  are 
deei^ened  by  persistent  misrepresentations  which  have 
just  enough  of  truth  to  give  tha  color  of  plausibility, 
we  shall  here  speak  of  the  resistance,  which,  at  every 
step,  was  offered  to  the  encroachments  of  Rome  upon 
the  liberties  of  the  Church. 

The  Italian  missionary  was  not  long  content  with 
confining  himself  to  the  work  of  converting  the  heathen 
conquerors  of  Kent,  but  felt  called  upon  to  meddle  with 
the  worship,  ceremonies,  and  observances  of  the  native 
Church  in  order  that  they  might  be  conformed  to  the 
Roman  usage.  It  is  probable  that,  but  for  Augustine's 
haughty  demeanor,  he  would  have  succeeded  in  pur- 
Buading  the  Celts  to  make  some  of  the  desired  changes. 
In  A.  D.  603,  seven  Bishops,  accompanied  by  many 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS   AND    THEIR    RESISTANCE.       243 

learned  men  from  the  famous  Monastery  of  Bangor, 
met  him  in  a  conference.  Augustine  and  his  monks, 
failed  to  rise  and  to  receive  courteously  the  Bishops 
and  their  attendants  upon  their  arrival.  This  slight 
set  the  natives  against  the  foreigners.  So  when  Augus- 
tine had  explained  the  object  of  the  meeting,  and  made 
his  demands,  it  was  replied  in  substance:  *' We  will  ob- 
serve none  of  your  customs,  nor  accept  you  as  our 
chief.  If  you  would  not  rise  up  to  us  just  now,  how 
much  more  will  you  despise  us  if  we  begin  to  be  subject 
to  you.  We  indeed  owe  fraternal  love  to  the  Church  of 
God  and  to  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  but  we  owe  no  obedi- 
ence to  him  whom  you  call  Pope.  Besides,  we  cannot 
submit  ourselves  to  him  or  to  you,  his  representative, 
because  we  are  already  subject  to  the  Metropolitan 
Bishop  of  Caerleon-on-Usk  [now  the  See  of  St.  David's, 
Wales],  who  is,  under  God,  our  spiritual  overseer."  Of 
the  eight  Sees  of  these  seven  British  Bishops  and  their 
Archbishop,  all  of  which  were  in  existence  at  least  a  hun- 
dred years  before  the  coming  of  Augustine,  two,  Lan- 
Patern  and  Morgan,  are  extinct;  the  other  six,  namely, 
Hereford,  Worcester,  Llandaff,  Bangor,  St.  Asaph, 
and  St.  David's,  have  existed  continuously  from  that 
day  to  this ;  a  standing  visible  proof  of  a  Christianity 
still  existing  in  Britain,  that  was  not  brought  there  by 
Roman  missionaries. 

The  conference  between  Augustine  and  the  British 
Bishops,  marks  the  first  of  a  series  of  protests  against 
Roman  encroachments  that  extended  through  a  thou- 
sand years,  of  which  we  can  take  notice  of  only  a  few,  in 
the  briefest  words  possible. 

Toward  the  close  of  the  seventh  century,  Wilfrid, 
Bishop  of  York,  had  some  difficulty  with  Theodore, 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury.  Wilfrid  appealed  his  case 
to  the  Bishop  of  Rome  who  commanded  that  he  should 


244 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OP  ENGLAND. 


be  reinstated  into  his  Bishopric.  The  matter  came  up 
for  consideration  before  the  Witan  or  the  Parliament  of 
those  days.  "Who,"  said  the  rulers  of  the  nation,  in 
eifect,  "who  is  the  Pope  and  what  are  his  decrees? 
What  have  thev  to  do  with  us,  or  we  with  them  ?  Have 
we  not  the  right  and  power  to  manage  our  own  affairs, 
and  to  punish  in  our  discretion  all  offenders  against 
our  laws  and  customs?"  So  they  burned  the  parch- 
ment containing  the  Pope's  directions,  and  cast  Wil- 
frid into  prison.  Afterwards,  in  the  National  Anglo- 
Saxon  Synod  of  Osterfield,  Wilfrid  reproached  the 
members  with  having  "openly  opposed  the  Pope's 
authority  for  twenty-two  years  together." 

In  A.  D.  747,  when  it  was  proposed  at  a  Council  to 
refer  difficult  questions  to  the  Bishop  of  Kome,  those 
present  refused  to  entertain  it,  and  declared  they  would 
submit  to  the  authority  of  the  Archbishop  of  Canter- 
bury in  such  matters. 

The  Anglo-Saxon  Church  was  certainly  independent 
of  Rome  down  to  the  Norman  Conquest,  a.  d.  1066. 
For  when  William  was  making  his  plans  for  the  sub- 
jugation of  England,  he  secured  the  Pope's  blessing  and 
cooperation  upon  the  representation  tliat  he  desired  to 
bring  the  Church  of  that  country  under  the  dominion  of 
the  Roman  See.  This  was  the  surest  way  to  gain  the 
Pope's  approval,  for,  as  the  histoiian  Freeman  says  in 
his  Norman  Conquest,  "England's  crime  in  the  eyes  of 
Rome — the  crime  to  punish  which,  William's  crusade  was 
approved  and  blessed— was  the  independence  still  re- 
tained by  the  Island,  Church,  and  Nation.  A  land  where 
the  Church  and  Nation  were  but  different  names  for  the 
same  community,  a  land  where  Priests  and  Prelates 
were  subject  to  the  law  like  other  men,  a  land  where  the 
King  and  his  Witan  gave  and  took  away  the  staff  of  a 
Bishop,  was  a  land  which,  in  the  eyes  of  Rome,  was  more 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS   AND   THEIR    RESISTANCE.      245 


dangerous  than  a  land  of  Jews  and  Saracens."  But 
William,  after  his  successful  conquest,  was  quite  as 
loath  to  give  the  country  over  to  Papal  dominion  as 
his  predecessors  had  been.  In  a  letter  to  the  Pope  he 
writes  thus:  "Thy  legate  Hubert,  Holy  Father,  hath 
called  upon  me  in  thy  name  to  take  the  oath  of  fealty 
to  thee  and  to  thy  successors,  and  to  exert  myself  in  en- 
forcing the  more  regular  payment  of  the  money  which 
my  predecessors  were  accustomed  to  remit  to  the 
Church  of  Rome.  One  request  I  have  granted,  the  other 
I  refuse.  Homage  to  thee  I  have  not  chosen,  nor  do  I 
choose,  to  do.  I  never  made  a  promise  to  that  effect, 
neither  do  I  find  that  it  was  ever  performed  by  my  pred- 
ecessors to  thine."  A  word  of  explanation  in  regard 
to  the  money  referred  to  in  William's  letter  is  necessary 
to  prevent  misunderstanding.  It  was  not  an  obliga- 
tory tribute,  but  a  voluntary  gift  for  the  support  of  a 
school  at  Rome  where  English  youths  were  to  have  in 
return  the  advantages  of  a  liberal  education.  "The 
regularity  of  its  payment  depended  upon  the  pros- 
perity of  the  country,  and  upon  the  rise  and  fall  of  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  popular  esteem." 

Early  in  the  twelfth  century,  Warelwast,  Bishop  of 
Exeter,  was  sent  to  Rome  for  the  purpose  of  bearing 
official  protestation  against  the  repeated  effort  of  the 
Pope  to  meddle  with  English  affairs,  and  of  explaining 
to  His  Holiness  "that  the  Church  and  realm  of  England 
occupied  a  different  position  from  the  continental  king- 
doms and  Churches,  and  had  always  been  independent 
of  Papal  jurisdiction."  "  There  are  abundant  proofs," 
writes  Bishop  Coxe,  "that  the  Anglican  Church  was 
everywhere  recognized  as  maintaining  an  exceptional 
position,  other  than  that  of  the  Latin  Churches  con- 
nected with  'the  Holy  Roman  Empire.'  At  the  Council 
of  Bari,  a.  d.  1098,  when  Anselm's  spare  and  modest 


246 


fHE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


figure  was  bidden  from  Urban  IL,  at  a  bumble  distance 
from  bis  tbrone,  be  cried  out,  *Anselm,  fatber  and  mas- 
ter, wbere  art  tbou?'  Wben  be  very  meekly  advanced, 
tbe  Pontiff  gave  bim  a  privileged  seat,  and  added,  '  We 
include  bim  indeed  in  our  oecumene,  but  as  tbe  Pope  of 
anotber  oecumene.'  Wbatever  meaning*  be  may  have 
attached  to  bis  almost  prophetic  words,  it  is  evident 
that  be  regarded  bim  as  a  Patriarch,  and  as  somewhat 
which  others  were  not." 

To  this  period  also  belongs  tbe  famous  correspond- 
ence of  Pope  Pascal  II.,  who  wrote  to  the  King  and 
Bishops  of  England  two  letters,  which,  as  has  frequently 
been  observed,  show  beyond  all  doubt  that,  at  tbe  time 
wben  tbe  Papal  power  was  at  its  zenith,  tbe  Church 
of  England  was  a  thoroughly  self-governing  body, 
possessed  of  its  own  system  of  Ecclesiastical  law  and 
administration,  and  also  that  tbe  Pope's  power  of  visi- 
torial  interference  bad  no  existence.  The  letters  are  too 
long  for  transcription  here,  but  a  short  extract  or  two 
will  be  sufficient  to  demonstrate  the  truth  of  the  above 
observation.  "From  tbe  Apostles  St.  Peter  and  St. 
Paul,"  says  the  Pope,  "tbe  custom  has  been  handed 
down  to  us  that  the  more  weighty  affairs  of  tbe  Church 
should  be  managed  or  reviewed  by  our  See.  But  you, 
in  despite  of  this  long-established  custom,  settle 
among  yourselves  tbe  business  relating  to  Bishops, 
without  even  consulting  us.  You  will  not  allow  tbe  op- 
pressed to  make  their  appeals  to  the  Apostolic  See.  You 
venture  without  our  knowledge  to  celebrate  tbe  Coun- 
cils and  Synods.  You  even  attempt,  without  our 
knowledge,  to  make  translation  of  Bishops,  an  un- 
warrantable liberty,  as  such  affairs  ought  not  to  be  at- 
tempted except  by  our  authority.  If  for  tbe  future,  you 
are  willing  to  pay  a  due  respect  to  the  Apostolic  See, 
we  will  treat  you  as  brothers  and  sons;  but  if  you  per- 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS    AND   THEIR   RESISTANCE.       247 

sist  in  your  obstinacy  we  shall  shake  off  tbe  dust  of  our 
feet  against  you,  and  deliver  you  to  tbe  vengeance  of 
God  as  backsbders  from  the  Catholic  Church." 

Resistance  to  tbe  encroachment  of  tbe  Popes,  not- 
withstanding this  threat,  was  persisted  in  until  tbe  be- 
ginning of  tbe  thirteenth  century,  less  than  two  hundred 
years  before  the  Reformation,  wben,  through  the  traitor, 
King  John,  the  State  and  Church  were  all  but  given  over 
as  plunder  to  Rome.  But  this  they  did  not  submit  to 
long.  The  Archbishop  of  Canterbury  became  tbe  head 
of  a  great  popular  uprising  which  left  the  King  helpless 
in  spite  of  all  that  his  ally,  the  Pope,  could  do  for  bim. 
On  June  15tb,  a.  d.  1215,  John  was  compelled  to  sign 
tbe  famous  Magna  Charta.  Tbe  first  provision  of  this 
renowned  document  runs:  "The  Church  of  England 
shall  be  free  and  bold  her  rights  entire  and  her  liberties 
inviolate."  After  specifying  these  rights  and  providing 
for  the  freedom  of  the  subject,  and  law  and  order  in  the 
realm,  tbe  Charta  concludes  with  a  reassertion  of  its 
initial  principle:  "That  the  Church  of  England  be  free, 
and  that  all  men  have  and  hold  the  aforesaid  liberties 
truly  and  peaceably,  freely  and  quietly,  and  wholly  in 
all  things  and  in  all  places  forever." 

About  tbe  middle  of  tbe  thirteenth  century,  Robert 
Grosseteste,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  successfully  resisted  at- 
tempted Papal  interference  in  the  affairs  of  his  Diocese. 
In  his  sermons  he  boldly  connected  the  misery  of  tbe 
people  with  the  wickedness  of  the  Popes,  whom  be  char- 
acterized as  devouring  wolves  in  sheep's  clothing.  Said 
he:  "The  Roman  Pontiff  and  bis  Court  are  tbe  foun- 
tain and  the  origin  of  all  the  evils  of  the  Church." 

In  the  year  1307,  Parliament  protested  against  tbe 
multiplied  forms  of  Papal  exaction,  and  refused  to 
allow  the  Pope's  tax-gatherer  to  leave  the  country  with 
money  be  bad  collected.  Shakespeare  was  not  mistaken 


I 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 

in  putting  these  vigorous  words  in  the  month  of  the 
England  of  this  period  : 

"Thou  canst  not,  Cardinal,  devise  a  name 
So  slight,  unworthy,  and  ridiculous 
To  charge  me  to  an  answer,  as  the  Pope. 
Tell  him  this  tale ;  and  from  the  mouth  of  England 
Add  thus  much  more— that  no  Italian  Priest 
Shall  tithe  or  toll  in  our  dominions. 
Though  you,  and  all  the  kings  of  Christendom 
Are  led  so  grossly  by  this  meddling  Priest, 
Dreading  the  curse  that  money  may  buy  out, 
And  by  the  merit  of  vile  gold,  dross,  dust. 
Purchase  corrupted  pardon  of  a  man, 
Who  in  that  sale  sells  pardon  from  himself, 
Yet  I  alone,  alone  do  me  oppose 
Against  the  Pope,  and  count  his  friends  my  foes." 

,  Toward  the  middle  of  the  fourteenth  century,  the 
foreign  Clergy  were  expelled  fiom  the  country,  ships 
which  brought  them  hither  were  confiscated,  and  any 
who  brought  Papal  letters  or  bulls  into  the  land,  were 
condemned  to  forfeit  all  their  possessions.  Soon  after- 
ward, the  Statutes  of  Provisors  and  Praemunire  were 
passed.  The  first  of  these  ordered  that  '*  Kings  and  all 
other  Lords  are  to  present  unto  benefices  of  their  own 
or  their  ancestors'  foundations,  and  not  the  Pojie  of 
Rome,"  and  the  second  that  "all  who  should  sue  for  re- 
dress in  the  Papal  court  should  be  put  out  of  the  pro- 
tection of  the  laws  of  England,  and  forfeit  all  their 
goods  to  the  State."  It  was  about  this  time  that  John 
Wyckliffe,  "the  Morning  Star  of  the  Reformation,"  was 
engaged  in  his  wonderful  work  of  opposing  the  Romish 
encroachments,  and  in  translating  the  Bible  into  Eng- 
lish. This  was  one  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  the 
time  of  Martin  Luther. 

A  little  later,  in  A.  d.  1420,  "Archbishop  Chichele, 
when  censured  by  Pope  Martin  V.  for  not  disregarding 


I 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS    AND    THEIR    RESISTANCE.       249 

the  English  laws  which  prevented  the  Pope  from  appoint- 
ing to  English  benefices,  told  him  that  he,  himself,  was 
the  only  Bishop  in  England  who  did  pay  any  attention 
to  orders  from  Rome ;  and  when  Martin,  by  way  of  reply, 
took  away  from  him  his  rank  of  ex-oflScio  legate,  and 
bestowed  that  title  on  another  Bishop,  proceeding  fur- 
ther to  excommunicate  all  the  other  Prelates,  and  to 
threaten  an  interdict,  his  Bulls  were  stopped  by  the 
government,  and  the  Archbishop  appealed  at  once  to  a 
General  Council,  while  the  new  legate  was  never  suffered 
to  act  in  that  character." 

Finally,  about  a  century  later,  came  the  Reformation 
when  the  Papal  yoke  of  which  the  whole  nation  had  all 
along  been  so  impatient  was  at  last  cast  off.  In  March, 
A.  D.  1534,  the  Convocation  of  Canterbury  declared  that 
the  Roman  Pontiff  has  no  greater  jurisdiction  given  to 
him  by  God  in  this  kingdom  than  any  other  foreign 
Bishop,  and  in  the  following  June,  the  Convocation  of 
York  adopted  substantially  the  same  resolution. 

Even  this  necessarily  rapid  and  condensed  sketch  of 
the  resistance  of  the  Church  of  England  to  the  encroach- 
ments of  the  Papacy  upon  her  liberties,  is  quite  sufficient 
to  justify  a  passage  in  one  of  the  earlier  writings  of 
Cardinal  Manning:  "If,"  said  he,  "any  man  will  look 
down  along  the  line  of  early  English  History,  he  will 
see  a  standing  contest  between  the  rulers  of  this  land 
and  the  Bishops  of  Rome.  The  Crown  and  Church  of 
England,  with  a  steady  opposition,  resisted  the  entrance 
and  encroachment  of  the  secularized  Ecclesiastical 
power  of  the  Pope  in  England.  The  last  rejection  of 
it  was  no  more  than  a  successful  effort  after  many  a 
failure  in  a  struggle  of  the  like  kind."  "Through  the 
long  ages  of  Roman  domination,"  writes  Bishop  Light- 
foot,  "the  English  Church  was  the  least  enslaved  of  all 
the  Churches.    Her  statute  book  is  a  continued  protest 


250 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


against  this  foreign  aggression.  Her  ablest  kings  were 
the  resolute  opponents  of  Roman  usurpation.  When 
the  yoke  was  finally  thrown  off,  though  the  strong  will 
of  the  reigning  sovereign  was  the  acting  agent,  yet  it 
was  the  independent  will  of  the  Clergy  and  of  the  people 
which  rendered  the  change  possible.  Hence  there  was 
no  break  in  the  continuity  of  the  English  Church.'' 


No  labored  or  extended  argument  is  now  needed  to 
prove  that  the  Mother  Church  of  England  is  a  true 
branch  of  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ.  We  need  only 
to  appeal  to  the  history  that  has  been  reviewed,  and  to 
the  Roman  Church  itself.  For  it  must  be  remembered 
that  the  English  Church  continued  in  communion  with 
the  Church  of  Rome  until  the  promulgation  of  the  Pope's 
Bull  of  excommunication  in  the  year  1570,  which  was 
thirty-five  years  after  the  repudiation  by  Parliament 
and  Convocation  of  the  usurped  Papal  Supremacy  in 
England.  During  this  long  interval  of  a  full  genera- 
tion, Anglican  Sacraments  and  Orders  were  regarded  as 
valid  at  Rome.  And  if  the  English  Church  retained  her 
Catholicity  for  so  many  years  after  the  Reformation, 
no  living  man  can  show  why  she  has  not  continued  to 
be  truly  Catholic  until  the  present  day.  Rome  has  never 
(|uestioned  the  Catholicity  of  the  Anglican  Church  be- 
tween the  landing  of  Augustine  and  the  Reformation. 
She  cannot  deny  the  Catholic  character  of  the  pre-Au- 
gustinian  Church  in  Britain,  for  the  British  Bishops 
had  undisputed  seats  in  the  great  Church  Councils. 
Pope  Leo  Xin.,in  his  recent  declaration  concerning  the 
invalidity  of  Anglican  Orders  conveniently  loses  sight 
of  these  indisputable  facts  of  history. 

In  view  of  all  this,  we  may  well  ask  with  a  writer  in 
one  of  the  periodicals :   Are  Romanists  sincere  when 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS    AND    THEIR    RESISTANCE,       251 

they  allege,  as  an  historical  fact,  that  Henry  VIII.  was 
the  founder  of  the  English  Church?  Alfonso  M.  Lig- 
uori,  a  Doctor  of  the  Roman  Communion,  says  in  his 
History  of  Heresies  and  Their  Refutation,  "Mary, 
likewise,  proclaimed  the  innocence  of  Cardinal  Pole,  and 
requested  Julius  III.  to  send  him  to  England  as  his  leg- 
ate a  latere.  He  arrived  soon  after,  and,  at  the  request 
of  the  Queen,  reconciled  the  Kingdom  again  to  the 
Church,  and  absolved  it  from  schism.  On  the  Vigil  of 
St.  Andrew,  a.  d.  1554,  he  confirmed  in  their  Sees  the 
Catholic  Bishops,  though  installed  in  the  time  of  the 
schism,  and  recognized  the  new  Sees  established  by 
Henry.  All  this  was  confirmed  by  Paul  IV."  In  this 
proclamation,  the  Bishops  are  styled  "  Catholic,"  and 
the  Anglican  Church  is  represented  as  being  in  schism, 
but  no  mention  of  Henry  being  the  founder  of  the  Eng- 
lish Church  is  made,  although  this  would  have  been  the 
proper  time  to  have  asserted  the  fact,  if  such  were  the 
case.  Thus  the  Popes  and  Roman  historians  being  wit- 
nesses, the  Church  of  England  is  a  true  branch  of  the 
One,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ. 


This  apologetic  dissertation  concerning  the  Mother 
Church  of  our  race  would  be  incomplete  without  some 
fuller  reference  to  two  objections  which  are  constantly 
urged  against  her.  The  first  of  these  is  that  she  was 
founded,  or  at  least  reformed  by  the  adulterous  Henry 
VIII.,  and  the  second,  that  her  reformation  was  so  in- 
complete that  she  is  still  permeated  with  Romanism. 

1.  Of  course,  educated  persons  know  that  only  the 
grossly  ignorant  or  dishonest  can  maintain  that  Henry 
VIII.  founded  the  present  Church  of  England,  and  so 
this  objection  has  no  weight  with  them.  They  see  that 
the  great  Tudor,  who  lived   less  than  four  hundred 


252 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


years  ago,  could  not  have  founded  a  Church  that,  as  an 
overwhelming  accumulation  of  evidence  proves,  has 
had  a  continuous  existence  from  the  present  day  back 
through  the  ages,  one  thousand  seven  hundred  years, 
to  the  very  threshold  of  the  time  of  the  Apostles. 

It  must,  however,  be  admitted  that  Henry  YIII.  did 
have  a  great  deal  to  do  with  ridding  the  Church  of 
Papal  interference,  and  that  the  part  he  took  would 
perhaps  not  have  been  taken  but  for  his  iniquitous 
matrimonial  schemes.  But  when  our  objectors  go  so 
far  as  to  leave  the  impression  that  but  for  the  King's 
guilty  love  for  Anne  Boleyn,  there  would  have  been  no 
Reformation  in  England,  and  that  the  Church  would 
have  continued  under  the  tyranny  of  Rome,  they  take 
an  untenable  position.  It  must  be  evident  to  all  who 
have  even  a  cursory  knowledge  of  the  drift  of  events  in 
England,  that  the  rupture  could  not  have  been  much 
longer  deferred.  Henry  VIII.  was  simjjly  the  instru- 
ment in  God's  hands  for  setting  in  operation  and  guid- 
ing the  Reformation,  and  except  in  his  determination 
to  get  rid  of  the  Pope's  usurped  authority  in  England, 
he  was  a  very  unwilling  tool  of  Providence.  In  view 
of  the  fact  that  the  Pope  dubbed  him  **  Defender  of 
the  [Roman  Catholic]  Faith"  for  a  tractate  which  he 
wrote  against  the  German  Reformation,  and  that  he 
left  money  for  the  saying  of  masses  forever  for  his  soul, 
it  is  highly  ridiculous  to  attribute  the  Anglican  Re- 
formation to  him.  If  Henry  VIII.  hanged  the  men  who 
believed  in  the  Pope,  he  burned  alive  those  who  disbe- 
lieved in  transubstantiation  and  auricular  confession. 
His  laws  would  have  sent  to  the  stake  every  Bishop, 
Priest  and  Deacon  who  accepts  the  Anglican  Prayer 
Book. 

If  our  ancestors  could  have  had  the  choosing  of  the 
instrument,  they  doubtless  would  have  chosen  a  more 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS    AND    THEIR    RESISTANCE.       253 

exemplary  man,  but  the  choice  could  hardly  have 
fallen  upon  a  better  King.  For  it  is  universally  con- 
ceded that,  notwithstanding  his  moral  imperfections, 
Henry  VIII.  was  one  of  the  ablest  and  most  popular 
monarchs  w^ho  ever  occupied  the  English  throne,  or,  in 
fact,  that  of  anv  other  nation.  "He  carried  the  coun- 
try  safely,  without  massacre  and  without  a  general 
civil  war,  through  the  most  tremendous  crisis  that 
ever  existed  in  England."  The  uneducated  and  un- 
principled Romanist  or  Denominationalist  who  pours 
contempt  upon  the  English  Church  and  her  American 
Sister  because  of  the  domestic  faults  of  Henry  VIII. 
should  in  justice  not  altogether  lose  sight  of  his  regal 
virtues.  Nor  must  they  be  allowed  to  forget  that 
his  character  compares  very  favorably  with  that  of 
some  of  the  great  Puritan  leaders  and  is  positively 
respectable  in  comparison  with  that  of  many  of  the 
Popes. 

So  far  as  Puritanism  is  concerned,  take  its  great  hero, 
Oliver  Cromwell.  His  memory  to  this  day  is  held  in 
bitter  execration  throughout  England  and  especially 
in  Ireland  where  his  ruthless  butcheries  were  such  as  to 
be  almost  without  parallel  in  the  annals  of  inhumanity. 
He  landed  in  Dublin  with  an  army  in  a.d.  1649.  Several 
battles  were  fought,  and  men,  women  and  children  were 
indiscriminately  slaughtered.  Houses  w^ere  pillaged 
and  burned;  Churches  desecrated,  and  terror  reigned 
wherever  he  went.  For  a  long  time  the  Irish  would 
say:  "The  curse  of  Cromwell  upon  you,"  when  they 
desired  an  expression  of  hatred.  In  view  of  this,  and 
much  more  of  which  it  is  a  piece,  the  several  writers 
of  first  rank  who  denounce  him  as  a  bloody  tyrant 
would  seem  to  have  truth  on  their  side.  Certainly 
his  military  cruelties  brought  more  suffering  and  sorrow 
to  the  world  than  that  which  resulted  from  the  conju- 


254 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


i 


i> 


gal  infidelities  of  Henry  VIII.  And  as  for  Romanism, 
Pope  John  XII.,  was  convicted  by  an  Italian  Synod  of 
almost  every  enormity  to  be  found  in  the  catalogue 
of  crime.  During  the  tenth  century  about  thirty  Pon- 
tiffs occupied  the  Papal  chair.  Each  succeeding  one  sur- 
passed, if  possible,  his  predecessor  in  abominable  crimes. 
The  mind  sickens  in  reviewing  the  enormities  of  these 
monsters  of  wickedness.*  Even  King  Edgar,  who,  though 
not  a  severe  moralist,  was  a  saint  if  compared  with  the 
Pontiffs  of  his  time,  has  recorded  his  testimony  against 
them.  "We  see  in  Rome,"  he  says,  **only  debauchery, 
licentiousness,  and  drunkenness  f  the  houses  of  Priests 
are  the  shameful  abodes  of  harlots,  and  of  worse  than 
these.  In  the  dwelling  of  the  Pope,  they  gamble  by 
night  and  by  day.  Instead  of  fastings  and  prayers, 
they  give  place  to  bacchanalian  songs,  lascivious 
dances,  and  the  debauchery  of  Messalina." 

It  should  be  remembered  also  that  Henry  VIII.  was 
not  the  only  very  imperfect  man  whom  God  has  been 
pleased  to  use  to  accomplish  His  great  purposes.  Jehu, 
one  of  the  greatest  reformers  among  all  the  Kings  of 
Israel,  fell  far  short  of  perfection.  ''  Constantine  estab- 
lished Christianity  in  the  Roman  Empire  and  Napoleon 
restored  it  in  France,  yet  who  cavils  at  either  of  these 
great  changes  on  account  of  the  want  of  personal  sanc- 
tity in  the  authors."  We  have,  therefore,  in  the  case  of 
Henry  VIII.,  only  one  of  many  historical  instances 
which  illustrate  the  truth  that  God's  ways  are  not 
man's  ways,  and  show  how  he  causes  the  wrath  of  man 
to  praise  Him,  and  brings  good  out  of  evil. 

But  really,  no  country  has  upon  the  whole  more  rea- 
son than  England  to  be  proud  of  those  who  were  con- 
spicuous in  bringing  about  its  reformation.  If  the 
political  part  of  it  was  wrought  by  Henry  VIII.,  the 

♦Lecture  II. 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS   AND    THEIR   RESISTANCE.       255 

doctrinal  and  spiritual  parts  were  accomplished  by  such 
men  as  Latimer,  Ridley,  Cranmer,  Jewel,  Parker,  Tay- 
lor, Hooker,  and  a  host  of  the  like,  who  for  their  piety, 
and  learning,  and  martyr  heroism,  shine  as  bright  stars 
in  the  Christian  firmament.  "After  all,"  says  the  fair- 
minded  Evangelist,  Barnes,  ^^rail  at  her  as  we  will,  there 
is  no  Church  on  earth  like  the  Church  of  England ;  no 
holy  army  of  martyrs  like  to  hers ;  no  ritual  so  pure 
and  uplifting ;  no  giants  of  theolegy  like  hers ;  no  his- 
tory on  the  whole  so  honorable." 

2.  As  to  the  objection  that  the  English  Reformation 
did  not  go  far  enough,  we  may  say  that  our  plan  con- 
templates a  fuller  answer  in  another  connection  than 
there  is  space  for  here.*  For  the  present,  therefore,  we 
shall  content  ourselves  with  an  appeal  to  representa- 
tive men  both  within  and  outside  of  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion. And  first,  there  are  the  great  English  theolo- 
gians, whose  writings  are  universally  acknowledged  to 
be  the  bulwark  of  the  Reformation ,  Pearson  and  But- 
ler—the latter  was  brought  up  in  non-conformity,  but 
left  it— and  Barrow,  and  Bull,  and  Beveridge,  and  Chil- 
lingworlh,  and  Taylor,  and  Ussher,  and  Leighton,  and 
Tillotson,  illustrious  divines,  whose  folios  form  the 
library  to  which  Denominationalists  as  well  as  Episco- 
palians go  for  sound  doctrine,  and  for  arguments  with 
which  to  refute  Roman  controversialists.  Then,  com- 
ing down  towards  our  own  time,  there  are  such  pro- 
found scholars  as  Arnold,  Maurice,  Whately,  Alford, 
Lightfoot,  Stanley,  Vaughan,  and  many  contempo- 
raries of  almost  equal  endowments  and  learning  who 
were,  if  we  are  to  believe  the  representations  of  Denom- 
inationalists, so  blind  and  ignorant  as  not  to  perceive 
that  by  remaining  in  the  English  Church  they  were  cast- 
ing the  weight  of  their  immense  infiuence  on  the  side  of 

♦Lecture  VI. 


256 


THE  MOTHER  CHURCH  OF  ENGLAND. 


deadly  error.  Nor  will  we  allow  those  who  accuse  us 
of  Romanism  to  pass  over  our  Laity  such  as  Glad- 
stone, Hatherley,  Selborne,  Wilberforce,  Shaftesbury, 
Gordon,  Salisbury,  Balfour,  and  our  own  George  Wash- 
ington, Patrick  Henry,  Peyton  Randolph,  Alexander 
Hamilton,  James  Madison,  John  Jay,  John  Marshall, 
and  a  host  of  others  whose  high  conscientiousness, 
taken  in  connection  with  their  well-known  Protestant 
sympathies,  forbid  us  to  believe  that  they  would  have 
clung  so  firmly  and  lovingly  to  the  English  and  Ameri- 
can Episcopal  Churches  if  these  were,  as  is  affirmed, 
tainted  to  the  core  with  Roman  and  Mediaeval  corrup- 
tions. On  the  contrary,  nothing  can  be  more  certain 
than  that,  if  our  criticisers  be  right,  the  great  majority 
of  them  would  have  found  their  way  into  one  or  another 
of  the  numerous  non-Episcopal  bodies  of  Christians. 

Moreover,  the  brightest  lights  that  non-Episcopal 
Protestantism  has  produced  have  given  their  unquali- 
fied indorsement  to  the  English  Reformation.  The  re- 
nowned Casaubon  of  Geneva  said :  ' '  Unless  1  am  deceived, 
the  most  perfect  part  of  the  whole  Reformation  is  in 
England,  where  the  study  of  antiquity  flourishes  along 
with  the  study  of  truth."  And  this  is  the  testimony  of 
the  greatest  jurist  and  theologian  of  the  seventeenth 
century,  Hugo  Grotius,  of  Holland :  ''  It  is  clear  to  me 
that  the  English  Liturgies,  the  custom  of  the  laying  on 
of  hands  on  those  arriving  at  years  of  discretion  in 
memory  of  their  Baptism,  the  regimen  of  Bishops,  the 
Presbyteries  composed  of  Clergy  alone,  with  many  other 
things  of  the  same  kind,  agree  with  the  customs  of  the 
ancient  Church,  from  which  we  cannot  deny  that  in 
France  and  Belgium  we  have  departed."  And  surely 
no  American  will  again  accuse  the  Episcopal  Church 
of  Romanism  after  reading  the  following  from  the  im- 
mortal Puritan  fathers:  "The  humble  request  of  his 


ROMAN    ENCROACHMENTS    AND    THEIR    RESISTANCE.       257 

Majesty's  loyal  subjects,  to  the  rest  of  their  brethren  in 
and  out  of  the  Church  of  England :  We  esteem  it  our 
honor  to  call  the  Church  of  p]ngland,  from  whence  we 
rise,  our  dear  Mother,  ever  acknowledging  that  such 
hope  and  part  as  we  have  obtained  in  the  common  sal- 
vation, we  have  received  in  her  bosom  and  sucked  it 
from  her  breasts."  But  the  witness  of  John  Wesley  will 
be  even  more  convincing  to  many  objectors.  There  is 
the  testimony  of  his  life-long  adherence  to  the  Church 
and  his  constant  refusal  to  allow  the  Methodists  to  sep- 
arate from  her.  Besides  we  have  his  express  words 
uttered  as  late  as  the  seventy-seventh  year  of  his  age  : 
"Having  had  an  opportunity  of  seeing  several  of  the 
Churches  abroad,  and  having  deeply  considered  the 
several  sorts  of  Dissenters  at  home,  I  am  fully  con- 
vinced that  our  own  Church  [the  Church  of  England] 
with  all  her  blemishes,  is  nearer  the  Scriptural  plan 
than  any  other  in  Europe." 

The  Faith  and  worship  of  the  English  and  American 
Episcopal  Churches  are  as  free  from  error  and  supersti- 
tion as  those  of  any  non-Episcopal  Denomination. 
Those  who  had  the  greatest  influence  in  the  Reforma- 
tion of  the  Church  of  England,  had  reference  in  all  they 
did  to  the  ancient,  uncorrupted  Church.  Dr.  Jewel, 
Bishop  of  Salisbury,  a  chief  reformer,  saj^s:  ''We  are 
come  as  near  as  we  possibly  could  to  the  Church  of  the 
Apostles  and  the  old  Catholic  Bishops  and  Fathers,  and 
have  directed  according  to  their  customs,  not  only  our 
Doctrine,  but  also  the  Sacraments  and  forms  of  Com- 
mon Prayer."  " I  protest,"  said  Cranmer,  ''that  it  was 
never  in  my  mind  to  write,  speak,  or  understand  any- 
thing, but  what  I  have  learned  of  the  Sacred  Scriptures 
and  of  the  Holy  Catholic  Church  of  Christ  from  the  be- 
ginning ;  and  also,  according  to  the  exposition  of  the  most 
holy  and  learned  Fathers  and  Martyrs  of  the  Church." 

C.  A.— 17 


258 


THE  MOTHER  CHUECH  OF  ENGLAND. 


The  guiding  principle  of  Cranmer,  Kidley,  Hooker,  Bull, 
Thorndike,  and  all  the  galaxy  of  the  English  Reforma- 
tion leaders,  is  also  well  expressed  in  the  following 
passage  from  Bishop  Beveridge:  '*  When  this,  our  Eng- 
hsh  Church,  through  long  communion  with  the  Ro- 
man Church,  had  contracted  like  stains  with  her,  from 
which  it  was  necessary  that  it  should  be  cleansed,  they 
who  took  that  excellent  and  very  necessary  work  in 
hand,  fearing  that  they,  like  others,  might  rush  from 
one  extreme  to  the  other,  removed  indeed  those  things, 
as  well  doctrines  as  ceremonies,  which  the  Roman 
Church  had  newly  and  insensibly  superinduced,  and,  as 
was  fit,  abrogated  them  utterly.  Yet,  notwithstanding, 
whatever  things  had  been  at  all  times  believed  and  ob- 
served by  all  Churches  in  all  places,  those  things  they 
most  religiously  took  care  not  so  to  abolish  with  them. 
Hence,  therefore,  these  first  reformers  of  this  particular 
Church  directed  the  whole  line  of  that  Reformation 
which  they  undertook,  according  to  the  rules  of  the 
whole  or  Universal  Church,  casting  away  those  things 
only  which  had  been  either  unheard  of,  or  rejected  by  the 
Universal  Church,  but  most  religiously  retaining  those 
things  which  they  saw  equally  corroborated  by  the 
consent  of  the  Universal  Church." 

If  there  were  two  or  more  Churches  that  could  make 
in  other  respects  equally  good  claims  to  our  allegiance, 
it  would  certainly  appear  to  be  the  will  of  God  that  we 
should  identify  ourselves  with  the  one  whose  govern- 
ment, doctrine,  and  worship  are  most  closely  patterned 
after  the  Church  of  the  earliest  and  purest  times.  As 
things  now  are,  Americans  who  choose  their  Church  re- 
lationship with  reference  to  the  primitive  model,  must 
give  the  preference  to  the  Episcopal  Church. 


Vi 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


LECTURE  V. 

THE  A/nnRlCAN  CHURCH. 

I.  The  Pre-Colonial  Church. 
II.  The  Colonial  Church. 
ni.  The  National  Church. 


(259) 


AUTHORITIES. 


I . 


m 


:i 


Anderson,  History  of  the  Colonial  Church.     (3  Vols.) 

Beardsley,  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Bishop  Seabury. 

Benham,  Short  History  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  America. 

Brand,  Life  of  Bishop  Whittingham.     (2  Vols.) 

Coleman,  Bp.,  The  Church  in  America. 

Hawks,  Contributions  to  the  Ecclesiastical  History  of  the  United 
States  of  America. 

Leonard,  Bp.,  Witness  of  the  American  Church  to  pure  Chris- 
tianity. 

McCoNNELL,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church. 

McVickar,  Professional  Years  of  Bishop  Hobart. 

Perry,  Bp.,  The  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church. 
(2  Vols.) 

Smitfi,  The  Church  in  the  New  Land. 

Stone,  Memoir  of  Bishop  Griswold. 

Ward,  Bishop  William  White. 

Wilberforce,Bp.,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church 

White,  Bp.,  Memoirs  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church  in  the 
United  States  of  America  from  its  organization  to  the  present  day. 

Wordsworth,  Canon,  Theophilus  Americanus. 


PAMPHLETS. 

Perry,  Bp.,  The  Faith  of  the  Framers  of  the  Constitution  of  the 
United  States. 

Perry,  Bp.,  The  Faith  of  the  Signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. 

Perry,  Bp.,  Historical  Sketch. 

Royce,  Historical  Sketches  of  the  Church  of  England  and  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Chureliiii  the  United  States. 


ml^WIWl'jf 


The  American  Church. 

WE  have  seen  that  the  Church  of  England  is  a 
branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ.*  A  review  of 
the  history  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church 
will  now  be  necessary  in  order  to  determine  whether  or 
not  the  connection  between  the  two  is  such  as  to  justify 
the  conclusion  that  in  becoming  or  remaining  an  Episco- 
palian, a  person  will  be  doing  the  will  of  Christ  by 
identifying  himself  with  His  Church. 


•'    I 


I. 

THE  PRE-COLONIAL  CHURCH. 

THIS  period  extended  through  the  one  hundred  and 
ten  years  from  the  discovery  of  the  American 
Continent  by  John  Cabot  in  a.  d.  1497,  to  the 
establishment  of  the  first  permanent  colony  in  the  year 
1607.  Before  the  planting  of  the  Jamestown  col- 
ony the  Church  had  no  organized  form.  It  is,  how- 
ever, matter  of  record  that  the  Cabots,  Drake,  Frob- 
isher,  Cavandish,  and  others  who  were  the  first  discov- 
erers, explorers  and  colonizers  of  various  parts  of  the 
North  American  Continent,  were  accompanied  by 
Priests  of  the  Church  of  England,  who  conducted  daily 
Morning  and  Evening  Frsbjer  w  hether  on  ship,  or  land. 
In  A.  D.  1579,  on  the  first  Sunday  after  Trinity, 
Francis  Fletcher,  Drake's  chaplain,  conducted  Service, 
preached  and  administered  the  Holy  Communion  on  the 


♦Lecture  IV. 


(261) 


'f 


i, 


!l 


THE   AMERICAN   CHURCH. 

shore  of  a  "fayre  and  good  baye,"  which  is  supposed  to 
be  Drake's  Bay,  about  thirty  miles  from  San  Francisco. 
These  are  the  first  recorded  Christian  Services  held 
within  the  present  limits  of  the  United  States.  They  are 
commemorated  by  the  massive  and  elaborately  carved 
"Prayer  Book  Cross  "  of  granite  placed  in  Golden  Gate 
Park,  San  Francisco,  by  the  late  Mr.  George  W.  Childs, 
of  Philadelphia. 

It  is  somewhat  uncei-tain  when  the  first  Baptism  was 
administered  in  this  country.  The  honor  is  claimed  on 
behalf  of  two  places  and  for  both  Romanists  and  Angli- 
cans. The  child  of  an  Indian  chief  is  said  by  some  to 
have  been  baptized  in  the  year  1570,  in  Virginia,  by 
Quiros,  a  Jesuit— one  of  a  small  colony  of  missionaries 
who  settled  in  the  wilderness,  but  after  a  few  years  were 
all  murdered  by  the  natives.  Others  maintain,  with  a 
greater  show  of  probability,  that  the  converted  chief, 
Manteo,  and  Virginia  Dare,  the  first  English  child  born 
in  America,  baptized,  respectively,  on  the  Ninth  and  the 
Tenth  Sundays  after  Trinity,  August  13  and  20,  1587, 
on  the  Island  of  Roanoke,  by  the  chaplain  of  Raleigh's 
second  colony,  were  the  first  recipients  of  the  Sacrament 
of  Regeneration.  Dr.  McConnell  confidently  asserts: 
*' These  were  the  first  fruits,  not  only  of  the  Church  of 
England,  but  of  Christianity  in  the  Colonies." 

But  there  was  no  continuity  in  the  Church's  life  for 
more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  later.  The  pre- 
colonial  Church  either  came  and  went  with  the  adven- 
turesome seamen,  or  lingered  only  while  the  several 
abortive  attempts  at  colonization  lasted.  So  devoid  of 
stability  and  the  essential  equipments  was  it  that  call- 
ing it  a  Church  is  only  possible  by  a  very  broad  applica- 
tion of  our  Lord's  words:  "Where  two  or  three  are 
gathered  together  in  My  name,  there  am  I  in  the  midst 
of  them." 


II. 


THE  COLONIAL  CHURCH, 


THE  American  Church  may  be  said  to  date  its 
organized  existence  from  the  establishment  of 
the  first  permanent  colony  at  Jamestown,  Vir- 
ginia, A.  D.  1607.  The  distinguished  honor  of  making 
the  beginning  of  this  Church  is  due  to  the  Rev.  Robert 
Hunt  who  conducted  daily  Morning  and  Evening 
Prayer,  preached  twice  every  Sunday,  and  administered 
the  Holy  Communion  quarterly.  The  scene  as  it  is 
briefly  described  in  the  quaint  phraseology  of  the  time, 
presents  to  the  imagination  a  striking  picture  of  the 
first  American  Church  edifice  and  worshipping  congre- 
gation. "  We  did  hang  an  awning  to  the  trees  to  shield 
us  from  the  sun,  our  walls  were  rails  of  wood,  our  seats 
unhewed  trees,  our  pulpit  a  bar  of  wood."  Here  on  an 
equally  rustic  Altar  occurred  the  first  recorded  celebra- 
tion on  the  Atlantic  seaboard  of  the  Holy  Eucharist 
according  to  the  English  Liturgy.  This  was  June  21, 
the  Third  Sunday  after  Trinity,  five  weeks  after  landing. 
The  colony  was  more  than  once  prevented  from 
breaking  up  by  dissension,  through  the  reconciling  infiu- 
ence  of  Mr.  Hunt.  The  Rev.  Alexander  Whittaker, 
styled  the  Apostle  to  the  North  American  Indian,  was 
Hunt's  worthy  successor.  It  was  he  who  baptized  the 
celebrated  Pocahontas  in  a.  d.  1611.  In  a.  d.  1619,  the 
first  elective  assembly  of  the  New  World  met  in  the 
Jamestown  Church.  It  was  opened  with  a  Prayer  Book 
Collect  by  one  of  the  Church's  Clergy.    Its  first  act  was 

(263) 


264 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


a  provision  for  tlie  protection  of  the  Indian  from  op- 
pression,  and  the  second  for  the  establishment  of  a 
university.  Thus  the  foundation  of  our  Eepublican 
form  of  government  was  laid  a  year  before  the  famous 
"Mayflower"  left  EDj>;land  with  the  first  of  the  Pilgrim 
colonists.  Our  Colonial  Church  was  established  seven 
years  before  the  Holland-Dutch  came  to  New  York, 
eleven  years  before  the  much-belauded  Massachusetts 
Bay  Puritans  landed,  and  twenty-seven  years  before 
Lord  Baltimore  came  with  the  first  colony  of  Roman- 
ists. From  all  this  it  will  be  seen  that  the  Episcopal 
Church  is  justly  entitled  to  the  distinction  which  her 
members  often  claim  for  her  of  being  denominated  "  the 
American  Church,"  or  ''the  Church."  This  is  not  be- 
cause she  is  the  largest  body  of  Christians  in  the  coun- 
try, nor  because  we  claim  her  to  be  the  only  true  branch 
of  the  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ,  but  owing  to  the  fact 
that  she  was  the  first  Church  to  celebrate  the  Christian 
w  orship  and  Sacraments  on  our  shores  as  she  was  also 
the  Church  of  the  first  permanent  settlers  within  the 
limits  of  the  thirteen  original  states.  It  must  be  re- 
membered, also,  that,  as  Bishop  Coleman  points  out, 
she  was  "by  charter  and  law  established  in  the  older 
colonies;  that  more  than  anv  other  Ecclesiastical 
organization  she  had  to  do  with  constituting  the  na- 
tion, and,  in  the  period  of  the  Civil  War,  with  its  main- 
tenance and  reunion ;  and  that,  while  conservative  and 
Catholic  in  her  character,  she  yet  is  distinctively  Amer- 
ican in  spirit." 

But  even  if  our  pretension  were  not  supported  by 
any  of  these  interesting  considerations,  it  would  be 
abundantly  justified  by  the  simple  fact  that  this  is  an 
English-speaking  nation,  and  ours  is  preeminently  the 
Church  of  the  English-speaking  race.  According  to 
the  idea  which  prevails  among  us,  it  is  necessary  iu 


THE    COLONIAL   CHURCH. 


265 


order  to  justify  our  existence,  for  us  to  claim  that  the 
Episcopal  Church  is  the  Church  of  the  American  people. 
To  us  it  seems  to  have  been  plainly  the  intention  of  the 
Master  to  establish  one  Church  only  which  was  to  be 
continued  by  the  Successors  of  the  Apostles,  called  Bish- 
ops. Each  Bishop  is,  by  virtue  of  his  Apostolic  authority, 
conveyed  through  Canonical  Consecration  by  successors 
of  the  Apostles,  supreme  in  his  own  Jurisdiction.  More- 
over, the  great  Ecumenical  Councils  made  provision  for 
the  protection  of  this  supremacy.  Therefore,  there  can 
be  only  one  Bishop  in  a  given  Diocese,  and  one  Church 
in  a  Nation.  If  two  or  more  bodies  exist  with  separate 
officers,  only  one  can  be  the  right  and  lawful  Church  of 
Christ,  the  others  must  be  usurpers  or  schismatics.  Our 
claim  to  be  the  Church  in  the  United  States  having  the 
right  to  exclusive  allegiance  is  canonically  justified  chiefly 
by  the  fact  that  this  country  was  originally  the  posses- 
sion of  the  English  Nation,  and  that  the  English  tongue 
and  laws  were  adopted  by  the  common  consent  of  the 
American  people.  The  Church  of  England  which  conse- 
crated and  gave  us  our  Bishops,  traces  its  descent  from 
the  Apostles  of  our  Lord  and  possesses  the  independence 
that  was  originally  conferred  upon  Her,  and  all  other 
National  (churches.  No  civil  officer  can  produce  a  more 
legitimate  authority  than  can  a  Bishop  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church.    Therefore  this  is  the  American  Church. 

The  colonial  Church  was  for  the  most  part  under  the 
nominal  supervision  of  the  Bishop  of  London.  But  this 
was  a  very  unsatisfactory  arrangement.  It  necessitated 
an  expensive  and  perilous  voyage  of  six  thousand  miles 
on  the  part  of  candidates  for  Holy  Orders.  This  kept 
many  from  applying  at  all,  and  of  the  few  whose  conse- 
crated zeal  impelled  them  forward,  a  large  proportion 
perished  by  shipwreck,  or  died  abroad  by  one  or  an- 
other of  the  pestilential  diseases,  so  common  a  century 


266 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


I'a 


I        J 


nr  two  ago  iu  all  parts  o!  Europe.  Under  these  circum- 
stances it  was  impossible  to  secure  an  adequate  staff  of 
native-born  Clergymen.  The  Church  was,  therefore, 
largely  dependent  upon  recruits  from  England.  And, 
unfortunately,  of  the  few  who  came,  some  were  either 
adventurers  or  persons  who  had  left  home  to  avoid  dis- 
cipline for  some  misdemeanor.  Laws  had  to  be  made  to 
restrain  such  from  even  the  gross  vices  of  gambling  and 
drunkenness,  and  to  force  them  to  discharge  the  duties 
they  were  neglecting.  As,  however,  the  Church  here  was 
practically  without  a  head,  these  unworthy  ministers 
escajjed  the  penalties  and  continued  to  work  havoc 
wherever  they  went. 

It  is  related  that  a  clergyman  on  his  way  to  Mary- 
land, or  purposing  to  emigrate,  died.  His  valet  as- 
sumed the  clerical  garb  of  his  master,  took  possession 
of  his  letters  of  Orders,  his  stock  of  sermons  and  other 
papers,  continued  the  journey  to  Maryland,  and  there, 
under  the  name  of  the  dead  clergyman,  had  charge  of  a 
parish  for  a  long  time.  This  outrage  also  occurred :  A 
known  profligate  in  Orders  obtained,  through  family 
influence,  an  important  parish.  The  incensed  congre- 
gation rose  up  and  declared  that  he  should  not  come 
among  them.  They  accordingly  barred  the  windows 
and  put  extra  locks  on  the  doors  of  the  Church.  But 
they  had  to  deal  with  a  resolute  man.  A  window  was 
forced,  and  when  the  good  people  entered  through  the 
opened  door  they  found  their  pastor  in  the  desk,  his 
opened  Prayer  Book  flanked  on  either  side  by  a  pistol, 
and  he  ready  to  address  them  as  '*  Dearly  beloved 
brethren."  Having  "read  himself  in,  "his  future  concern 
was  only  the  taxes  collected  for  the  support  of  religion. 

The  Northern  Clergy  were  of  the  most  exemplary 
character.  But  they  were  few,  and  suffered  much  perse- 
cution from  the  Puritans,  who  "assumed  the  right  of 


THE   COLONIAL  CHURCH. 


267 


taxing  all  for  the  support  of  their  ministers  and  meet- 
ing-houses; and,    wherever  they  could  gain  over  the 
local  Governor  to  their  persuasion,  proceeded  to  en- 
force their  claim  with  signal  violence."     "With  mel- 
ancholy hearts,"  a  member  of  the  "Church"  at  Wal- 
lingford,  Connecticut,  wrote  home  to  complain,  "have 
divers   of  us  been   imprisoned,  and  our  goods  from 
year  to  year  distrained  for  taxes  levied  for  the  build- 
ing and  supporting  of  meeting-ho.uses."    As  late  as  the 
year  1750,  an  old  man,  who  had  been  long  a  member 
of  the  Church,  was  whipped  publicly  for  not  attend- 
ing meeting.    Dr.  Peters,  a  contemporaneous  writer  of 
Colonial  History,  relates  that,  in  the  same  year  "an 
Episcopal  Clergyman,  born  and  educated  in  England, 
who  had  been  in  Holy  Orders  above  twenty  years,  once 
broke  their  Sabbatical  law  by  combing  a  discomposed 
lock  of  hair  on  the  top  of  his  wig ;  at  another  time,  by 
making  a  humming  noise,  which  they  called  whistling; 
at  a  third  time,  by  walking  too  fast  from  Church ;  at  a 
fourth,  by  running  into  a  Church  when  it  rained ;  at  a 
fifth,  by  walking  in  his  garden  and  picking  a  bunch  of 
grapes ;  for  which  several  crimes  he  was  complained  of 
by  the  Grand  Jury,  and  a  warrant  granted  against  him, 
was  seized,  brought  to  trial,  and  made  to  pay  a  consid- 
erable sum  of  money."    At  Hartford,  one  of  the  judges 
of  the  county  court,  assisted  by  the  mob,  pulled  down  a 
rising  Church,  and  with  the  stones  built  a  house  for 
his  son.    Mr.  Morton,  a  staunch  Churchman  of  Massa- 
chusetts, was  persecuted  violently,  all  the  more  because 
of  the  satires  contained  in  his  "New  English  Canaan." 
He  died  in  England  from  the  effects  of  his  imprisonment 
at  Boston. 

Owing  to  the  many  disadvantages  growing  out  of 
the  dependence  upon  a  foreign  Episcopate,  repeated  and 
persevering  efforts  were  made  to  secure  the  Consecration 


268 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


I 


of  Bishops  for  this  coimtry,  but  without  avail.    The 
celebrated    English   philanthropist,  Granville    Sharp, 
used  his  great  influence  on  behalf  of  the  neglected  sheep 
of  the  American  wilderness,  and  almost  succeeded  in 
bringing  about  the  Consecration  of  chief  shepherds  for 
them.    "'  Twice,"  says  the  author  of  "  The  Professional 
Years  of  Bishop  Hobart,"  "was  the  goodly  plan  frus- 
trated when  on  the  very  point  of  completion.    In  the 
reign  of  Charles  II.,  the  patent  was  actually  made  out, 
appointing  Kev.  Dr.  Alexander  Murray,  a  good  man, 
and  a  companion  of  the  King's  exile.  Bishop  of  Vir- 
ginia, with  a  general  charge  over  the  other  provinces ; 
but  the  scheme  fell  through  by  a  change  of  ministry, 
and  what  Clarendon  had  done,  the  '  Cabal '  revoked, 
though  the  deeper  cause  probably  was,  that  the  King, 
himself,  had  no  heart  in  the  matter.    A  second  time,  in 
the  reign  of  Anne,  was  provision  made,  a  scheme  of 
four  American  Bishoprics  adopted,  and  certain  govern- 
ment lands  in  the  Island  of  St.  Kitts  actually  sold  for 
their  endowment.     The  death  of  the  Queen  cut  this 
short,  and  although  subsequently  approved  and  recom- 
mended by  the  first  and  ablest  men  of  the  Church,  hf 
Berkeley,  Butler,  Gibson,  Sherlock,  and,  above  all,  by 
the  meekest  of  Prelates,  Archbishop  Seeker,  it  w^as  never 
carried   into  effect.''     ''At   one  time,"  writes  Canon 
Perry,  in  his  "History  of  the  Church  of  England," 
"  there  were  two  non-juring  Bishops  in  America,  namely. 
Dr.  R.  Welton,  and  Dr.  J.  Talbot,  a.  d.  1722,  the  former 
in  Philadelphia,  the  latter  in  Burlington,  N.  J.,  but 
they  were  not  allowed  to  exercise  Episcopal  functions, 
except  by  stealth,  and  the  government  soon  afterwards 
interfered  with,  and  put  an  entire  stop  to,  all  action  on 
their  part." 

The  failure  to  secure  the  Episcopacy  was  chiefly  due 
to  the  political  influence  of  the  Puritanical  sects.    But 


THE    COLONIAL  CHURCH. 


269 


Strange  as  it  may  appear,  some  of  the  Prelates  them- 
selves objected  to  the  giving  of  the  Episcopate  to  ''the 
New  World,"  upon  the  ground  that  there  could  be  no 
adequate  provision  made  in  such  a  barbarous  country 
for  the  due  support  of  Bishops  in  the  state  and  dignity 
which,  according  to  their  conception,  properly  belong 
to  them.    As  Dr.  McConnell  observes:  "The  idea  of  a 
Bishop  in  the  American  wilderness  was  as  grotesque  to 
them  as  now  would  be  the  suggestion  of  a  professor  of 
higher  mathematics  among  the  Zulus."    It  is  surpass- 
ingly strange  that  their  "  lordships,"  who  for  the  most 
part  were  really  good  and  learned  men,  should  so  far 
have  been  blinded  by  their  environment  as  altogether 
to  lose  sight  of  the  simplicity  of  the  Apostolic  and 
primitive  Episcopate.     But,  in  view  of  the  unfortu- 
nate experience  of  our  fathers,  it  is  even  more  inexplica- 
ble that  the  multiplication  of  Bishops  to  supply  the 
growing  needs  of  the  American  Church  is,  at  this  late 
date,  prevented  by  the  survival  of  the  misconceptions 
of  our  English  forefathers.    Large  sections,  in  many 
of  our   states   and   territories,  are  at   this  time  de- 
prived of  adequate  Episcopal  ministrations    because 
they  have  not  the  ability  to  make  "ample  provision" 
for   the   support  of  a  chief   shepherd.     An  able   edi- 
torial critic  thus  puts  the  unscriptural  and  unjustifi- 
able character  of  the  legislation  regulating  the  crea- 
tion of  new  Dioceses   and    Missionary   Jurisdictions: 
"It  is   the   fashion  to  talk  of  the  Episcopate  as  dis- 
tinctively the  Missionary  Order;  and  so  it  ought  to 
be;  but  the  Constitution  of  the   Protestant   Episco- 
pal Church  forbids  it  to   be  so  unless  on  conditions 
at  w^hich  the  Apostles  of  Jesus  Christ— men  who  w^ere 
sent  without  scrip  for  their  journey,  and  without  gold, 
silver,  or  even  brass  in  their  purses— would  have  been 
amazed." 


270 


THE    AMERICAN   CHUBCH. 


But  having,  in  accord  with  their  inherited  ideas,  con- 
ceived this  objection  against  responding  to  the  appeal 
of  the  Colonial  Church,  the  English  Bishops  were  doubt- 
less confirmed  in  it  by  the  fact  that  the  Clergy  already 
in  the  field  were  paid  in  tobacco  instead  of  in  gold,  and 
that  they  experienced  considerable  difficulty  in  collect- 
ing even  the  scanty  amount  of  that  indigenous  weed 
which  had  been  promised.  The  Clergy  often  had  occa- 
sion to  complain  that  the  tobacco  given  them  in  pay- 
ment for  their  salaries  was  inferior  in  quality.  The 
stipends  were  fixed  in  some  Parishes  at  sixteen  thousand 
pounds  of  tobacco  per  annum.  This  would  realize,  if 
the  article  were  of  the  best  grade,  the  equivalent  of 
between  four  and  five  hundred  dollars  of  our  money, 
upon  which  sum  the  Rectors  are  said  to  have  lived,  even 
when  married,  very  comfortably.  Why  could  not  a 
Bishop  have  done  the  same? 


No  wonder  that  under  these  circumstances  the 
Church  was  in  an  almost  hopelessly  depressed  condi- 
tion. At  the  South  she  was  nearly  ruined  by  the  irreg- 
ularities growing  out  of  the  want  of  Episcopal  over- 
sight, while  to  the  Northward  she  was  downtrodden 
and  all  but  crushed  out  by  Puritanism.  But  there  were 
many  notable  exceptions  among  the  Southerners,  of 
Clergymen  and  Laymen  who  were  examples  of  piety 
and  self-sacrificing  devotion.  And  in  the  course  of  time 
there  was  also  an  unmistakable  reaction  against  North- 
ern Puritanism. 

This  reactionary  movement  started  in  the  year  1722, 
among  the  faculty  and  graduates  of  Yale  College. 
Seven  of  these,  all  professors.  Congregational  or  Pres- 
byterian ministers,  were  accustomed  to  meet  together 
for  the  purpose  of  studying  and  discussing  the  claims  of 


THE   COLONIAL   CHURCH. 


271 


the  Episcopal  Church.     These  meetings  grew  out  of  a 
Prayer  Book,  which  many  years  before  had  providen- 
tially fallen  into  the  hands  of  President  Cutler,  and  from 
the  study  of  certain  standard  works  of  the  Anglican 
Divines,  contributed  by  the  eelebrat^ed  Dean  Berkeley,  to 
the  College  library.    One  of  them  tells  us  that  not  a  sin- 
gle path  was  left  untrodden,  which  seemed  likely  to  lead 
to  fresh  sources  of  knowledge.     The  best  writers  on 
either  side  of  the  controversy  were  carefully  consulted, 
and  their  arguments  deliberately  discussed  and  weighed. 
As  far  as  temporal  ease  and  prospects  were  concerned, 
it  would  have  been  a  welcome  result  to  these  inquirers, 
had  they  found  the  principles  of  Congregational  gov- 
ernment to  agree,  in  their  judgment,  with  those  of  the 
primitive  Church  of  Christ.     Such  a  conclusion  would 
have  retained  them  in  the  peaceful  discharge  of  their  ac- 
customed duties,  and   have   preserved   unbroken   the 
cords  of  love  which   bound   them   to   their   kindred, 
friends  and  country.    But  the  enjoyment  of  the  present 
ease  would  cease  to  be  a  blessing,  if  purchased  at  the 
cost  of  truth ;  and  come  therefore  what  might,  the  dic- 
tates of  conscience  were  to  be  obeyed.    When,  therefore, 
after  long  study  and  many  conferences,  they  had  fully 
made  up  their  minds  as  to  the  truth  of  the  Anglican 
Church's  position,  they  met  the  trustees  of  Yale  College 
and  astonished  them  beyond  measure  by  reading  the 
following  address : 

*'  To  the  Rev.  Mr,  Andrew  and  Mr.  Woodbridge  and  others,  our  Rev- 
erend Fathers  and  Brethren,  present  in  the  Library  of  Yale  College 
this  13th  of  September,  1722. 

"Reverend  Gentlemen:— Having  represented  to. 
you  the  diflSculties  which  we  labor  under,  in  relation  to 
our  continuance  out  of  the  visible  communion  of  an 
Episcopal  Church,  and  a  state  of  seeming  opposition 
thereto,  either  as  private  Christians,  or  as  officers, 
and  so  being  insisted  on  by  some  of  you,  after  our 


272 


THE   AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


THE   COLONIAL   CHURCH. 


273 


i 

I  III ' 


1^ 


Professors  and 
Ministers. 


repeated  declinings  of  it,  that  we  should  sum  up  our  case 
in  writing,  we  do,  though  with  great  reluctance,  fearing 
the  consequences  of  it,  submit  to,  and  comply  with,  it, 
and  signify  to  you  that  some  of  us  doubt  the  validity, 
and  the  rest  of  us  are  more  fully  persuaded  of  the  inva- 
lidity of  Presbyterian  Ordination, in  opposition  to  Epis- 
copal ;  and  should  be  heartily  thankful  to  God  and  man 
if  we  may  receive  from  them  satisfaction  herein ;  and 
shall  be  willing  to  embrace  your  good  counsels  and  in- 
structions in  relation  to  this  important  affair,  as  far  as 
God  shall  direct  and  dispose  us  to  do." 
Signed,  Timothy  Cutler, 

[President  of  Yale   College.] 

John  Hart, 
Samuel  Whittlesey, 
Jared  Eliot, 
James  Wetmore, 
Samuel  Johnson, 
Daniel  Brown, 

When  this  dMaration  was  made  there  was  only  one 
of  our  Clergymen  in  all  Connecticut.  In  the  course  of 
the  next  month,  at  the  suggestion  of  the  Governor  of 
the  Colony,  there  was  a  public  discussion  between  its 
signers  and  the  amazed  Puritans.  At  this  debate  Pres- 
byterians contended  that  the  Apostles,  in  the  nature  of 
things,  could  have  no  successors,  and  that  the  title 
Bishop,  which  Episcopalians  restrict  to  those  whom 
they  conceive  to  be  invested  with  Apostolic  authority, 
is  used  in  the  Epistles  as  a  synonym  of  Presbyter  or 
Elder.  It  was  shown  by  the  converts  to  Episcopacy, 
that  the  first  of  these  assertions  is  a  misleading  half 
truth.  It  is  of  course  true  that  the  Apostles  could  not 
transmit  to  successors  their  blessed  personal  experience 
as  the  privileged  Disciples  of  the  Lord,  their  Pentecostal 
illumination  and  inspiration,  their  ability  to  bear  the 
testimony  of  eye-witnesses  to  the  Resurrection  and  their 
power  to  work  miracles.  But  the  instances  of  St. 
Matthias  and  St.  Paul  prove  that  the  Apostolic  office 


was  not  limited  as  to  number,  or  person,  or  time,  for 
these  were  not  of  the  twelve  first  selected  by  Christ,  and 
yet  they  were  confessedly  none  the  less  Apostles.     '  - 

It  appears,  therefore,  from  Seripturethat  the  Apostles 
could  and  did  perpetuate  their  office  by  delegating  their 
authority  to  those  who  should  assist  and  succeed  them 
in  the  adminiHtration  of  the  Church.    To  argue  the  im- 
possibility of  this,  as  the  Presbyterians  do,  upon  the 
gi'ound  of  the  supernatuial  endowments  of  the  Apostles 
and  their  close  relationship  to  our  Lord,  is  as  incon- 
sistent and  contrary  to  human  experience  as  it  would 
be  to  insist  that  kings  and  princes  can  have  no  succes- 
sors,  because  they  cannot  convey  their  personality  to 
others.     Moreover,  according  to  this  hypothesis  the 
Elders  and  Deacons  could  have  no  successors,  for  they 
also  worked  miracles.    The  remark  of  Hooker  expresses 
the  truth  respecting  this  matter:    ^'In  some   things 
every  Presbyter,  in  some  things  only  Bishops,  in  some- 
things neither  the  one  nor  the  other,  are  the  Apostles' 
successors." 

The  circumstance   of  Presbyters  sometimes  being 

called  Bishops  in  the  New  Testament  and  vice  versa 

does  no  more  prove  that  there  was  no  dictinction  in 

office  and  authority,  than  the  calling  of  the  Apostles 

Elders  places  them  upon  a  level  with  the  Presbytery. 

They  also  called  themselves  Deacons.    Are  we  therefore 

to  conclude  that  the  Apostolate  and  Diacouate  a-e  the 

same  office  in  theChurch  of  the  NewTestament?  Bishop 

means  overseer  or  superintendent.    The  confusion  arises 

from  losing  sight  of  the  fact  that  Bishop  is  a  title  com- 

mon  to  the  members  of  both  the  Apostleship  and  Pres- 

bytership.     These    in    their    respective    spheres   were 

rulers.     The  Presbyter-bishops   were  local,    parochial 

superint^endents.  The  Apostle-bishops  were  General,  Dio- 

cesan  or  Metropolitan  superintendents.    The  difference 

C.  A.— 18 


274 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


'iM  I 


il! 


between  the  Presbyterian  and  Apostolic  Bishops  appears 
very  plainly  in  what  St.  Paul  had  to  say  to  the  repre- 
sentatives of  both  Orders  who  were  stationed  at  Eph- 
esus.  Upon  comparing  Acts  20:  28-36  with  I  Tim- 
othy 5:  1,  19-22,  and  II  Timothy  2:  2,  it  will  be 
observed  that  the  duties  required  of  them,  respectively, 
correspond  exactly  with  the  requirements  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  from  the  second  and  third  Orders  of  her 
ministry.  The  Presbyter-bishops  were  charged  with 
the  feeding,  protection  and  correction  of  particular 
flocks.  The  Apostle-bishops  were  exhorted  to  seek  out 
and  prepare  fit  men  for  the  Holy  Orders ;  to  ordain 
those  who  should  be  found  worthy,  and  to  administer 
discipline  to  the  Clergy  who  should  be  guilty  of  irregular 
life  or  heretical  teaching.  In  order  to  avoid  confusion 
it  was  not  very  long  before  Presbyters  ceased  to  be 
called  Bishops,  and  the  title  was  reserved  exclusively 
for  the  successors  of  the  Apostles.  This  rests  upon  the 
testimony  of  the  early  Fathers  who  tell  us  that  ''those 
who  in  their  day  were  called  Bishops  w^ere  first  called 
Apostles."  ''It  was  precisely  as  if,  by  the  common  con- 
sent of  the  American  ])eople,  springing  from  gratitude 
for  the  services,  and  veneration  for  the  memory,  of 
Washington,  it  should  be  determined,  for  the  future,  to 
appropriate  to  him  alone  the  title  of  jiresident ;  and  to 
all  his  successors  in  the  presidential  office  created  by 
the  constitution,  what  is  now  regarded  as  the  less  dig- 
nified name  of  governor.  It  would  not  abstract  one 
iota  from  the  constitutional  privileges  and  powers 
attached  to  the  oflSce  itself." 

Thus  the  representatives  of  Presbyterianism  at  the 
famous  Yale  debate  found  that  "  their  chief  argument, 
from  the  different  uses  of  the  words  Bishop  and  Presby- 
ter in  the  New  Testament,  was  met  by  the  incontest- 
able evidence  from  Scripture  of  the  superintendency  of 


THE   COLONIAL   CHURCH. 


275 


Timothy  over  the  Clergy  and  Laity  of  Ephesus,  and  of 
Titus  over  the  Church  in  Crete.    The  appeal  to  the  his- 
tory of  the  first  and  purest  centuries  of  the  Church  was 
made  until  at  length,  as  Johnson  records  it,  'an  old 
minister  got  up  and  made  an  harangue  against  us  in 
the  declamatory  way  to  raise  an  odium,  but  he  had  not 
gone  far  before  Mr.  Saltonstall,  the  Governor,  who,  him- 
self, presided,  got  up  and  said  that  he  only  designed  a 
friendly  argument, '  and  so  put  an  end  to  the  conference." 
The  Puritans  regarded  this  notable  defection  from 
their  ranks  w  ith  apprehension  and  dismay.    On  the  oc- 
casion of  the  celebration  of  the  one  hundred  and  fiftieth 
anniversary  of  Yale  College,  President  Woolsey,  refer- 
ring to  the  event,  said :  ''  I  suppose  that  gTeater  alarm 
would  scarcely  be  awakened    now,  if  the    theological 
faculty  of  the  college  were  to  declare  for  the  Church  of 
Rome,  avow  their  belief  in  transubstantiation  and  pray 
to  the  Virgin  Mary."    Nor  were  they  mistaken  in  the 
expectation   that   others   would   follow.      In    the  ten 
years  subsequent  to  that  memorable  declaration  more 
than  one  in  ten  of  the  graduates  of  Yale,  who  entered 
the   ministry,  followed   the  example  of  Cutler,  John- 
son.  Brown  and  Wetinore— the  leaders  of  the  great 
army  of  Denominational  ministers,  who,  from  that  day 
to  this,  have   been  drawn  into  the  Church's  service. 
So  many  were  the  accessions  to  the  Church  from  Con- 
gregationalism and  Presbyterianism  that  in  the  year 
1734  the  Independents  sent  a  petition  drawn  up  by  the 
famous  Jonathan  Edwards  to  the  Bishop  of  London, 
in  which  they  represented  to  his  lordship  that  they  did 
not  need  any  more  Church  missionaries  in  New  England,, 
as  they  only  drew  away  from  their  own  people  into  the 
Episcopal  ranks ;  that  there  w  as,  however,  great  need 
of  missionaries  in  Carolina  and  New  York,  and  not 
north  of  that. 


I 


m. 


I 


THE  NATIONAL  CHURCH, 

OtTR  National  Episcopal  Church  is  one  of  the  results 
of  the  American  Revolution.  It  was  not  that 
Churchmen  generally  preferred  to  be  independent 
of  the  Church  of  England,  but  that  owing  to  the  temper 
of  the  times,  and  the  relation  of  the  English  Church  to 
the  State,  it  was  simply  impossible  to  continue  the  re- 
lationship of  a  daughter  as  in  colonial  times.  Hence- 
^forth  the  Church,  if  it  continued  at  all,  must  be  re- 
garded as  an  independent  sister.  But,  as  a  matter  of 
fact,  it  looked  very  much  as  if  she  would  become  extinct. 
Many  of  her  own  sons  supposed  that  she  was  hopelessly 
prostrate,  and  despaired  of  her  resuscitation.  An 
anecdote  concerning  Chief  Justice  Marshall,  related  by 
Bishop  Meade,  is  illustrative  of  the  deep-rooted  impres- 
sion which  prevailed  that  the  Episcopal  Church  could 
not  be  revived. even  in  the  stronghold  of  old  Virginia. 
When  the  Bishop  ''soon  after  the  establishment  of  the 
Theological  Seminary  of  Virginia,  was  collecting  funds 
for  it,  he  presented  the  subscription  list  to  Judge  Mar- 
shall. With  his  usual  kindness  and  liberality,  he  set 
down  a  handsome  amount,  but  at  the  same  time  said 
he  really  feared  that  it  was  doing  an  unkindness  to  the 
young  men  of  Virginia,  thus  to  tempt  them  to  prepare 
for  the  ministry  of  a  Church  which  could  never  be 
revived.  He  lived,  however,  to  rejoice  in  seeing  the 
failure  of  his  fears  and  prophecy." 

Even  the  good,  and  for  the  most  part,  judicious.  Dr. 
William   White,  of   Philadelphia,  the  first  Bishop  of 

(276) 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


277 


Pennsylvania,  saw  no  hope  for  the  saving  of  the  feeble 
remnant   but  in  the   adoption  of  the   extraordinary 
measures  recommended  in  his  famous  pamphlet  writ- 
ten at  the  close  of  the  war.    In  it  he  advocated,  among 
other  novelties,  the  creation  of  a  temporary  fictitious 
p]piscopate,  ordained  by  I'lesbyters  and  Laymen.    The 
proposition  was  regarded  and  represented,  especially 
by  the  few  remaining  Northern  clergymen,  as  prepos- 
terous, and  there  is  reason  to  believe  that  Dr.  White 
himself  came  to  regret  this  production  of  his  pen.    At 
least,  on  the  blank  pages  in  the  back  of  his  private 
copy  there  was  found,  in  his  handwriting,  a  note  of  ex- 
planation and  justification  which  we  quote  here,  be- 
cause of  its  concise  description  of  the  condition  and 
prospects  of  the   Church  during,  and  for    some  time 
after,  the   struggle  for   Independence.    ''The   circum- 
stances," runs  the  note,  "attached  to  that  publication 
are  the  following:     The  congregations  of  our  Church 
throughout  the  United  States  were  approaching  annihi- 
lation.   Although  within  this  city  [Philadelphia]  three 
Episcopal  Clergymen,  including  the  author,  were  resi- 
dent and  officiating,  the  Churches  over  the  rest  of  the 
State  had  become  deprived  of  their  Clergy  during  the 
war,  either  by  death  or  departure  for  England.    In  the 
Eastern  States,  with  two  or  three  exceptions,  there  was 
a  cessation  of  the  exercises  of  the  pulpit,  owing  to  the 
necessary   disuse  of  the  prayers  for   the   former  civil 
rulers.    In  Maryland  and  Virginia,  where  the  Church 
had  enjoyed  civil   establishments,  on  the  ceasing   of 
these,  the  incumbents  of  the  parishes,  almost  without 
exception,  ceased  to  officiate.    Further  South  the  con- 
dition of  the  Church  was  not  better,  to  say  the  least." 
Then  follows  the  aged  Bishop's  explanation  of  why 
he  thought  that  the  true  Apostolic   Episcopate  could 
not  be  secured  in  time  to  save  the  Church  from  ruin. 


I 


278 


THE   AMERICAN   CHURCH. 


THE    NATIONAL   CHURCH. 


279 


But  in  the  Providence  of  God  this  was  to  be  another  of 
the  many  illustrations  of  the  maxim,  ''Man's  extremity 
is  God's  opportunity."  The  Blessed  Saviour  had  prom- 
ised that  the  gates  of  hell  or  death  should  not  prevail 
ap:aint  His  Church.  The  fact  that  the  Colonial  Church 
did  not  utterly  perish  in  the  dark  days  which  imme- 
diately preceded  and  succeeded  the  Revolution,  is  an 
all  but  conclusive  proof  of  its  Divine  and  indestructible 
character.  No  political  revolutions,  no  bigoted  perse- 
cutions, no  machinations  of  evil-minded  men  are  suffi- 
cient to  crush  out  the  Church  of  the  living*  God. 

"  Crowns  and  thrones  may  perish, 
Kingdoms  rise  and  wane. 
But  the  Church  of  Jesus  constant  will  remain." 

The  Colonial  Church  had  been  one,  with  the  Bishop 
of  London  as  the  center  of  unity,  but  after  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  the  remnant  of  the  Church  in  each 
colony  became  a  little  feeble  National  Church.  As  in 
the  period  of  the  Heptarchy,  there  were  seven  independ- 
ent branches  of  the  Apostolic  Church  in  England,  so  for 
some  time  there  were  thirteen  separate  and  distinct 
little  Episcopal  Churches  in  America,  as  there  were  also 
thirteen  little  nations  in  the  country.  These  were  con- 
solidated into  one  Church  and  one  nation  in  the  same 
vear.  And  it  is  noteworthy  that  in  manv  instances  the 
same  men  were,  under  God,  instrumental  in  the  unifica- 
tion of  both.  Two-thirds  of  the  framers  of  the  Consti- 
tution of  the  United  States  were,  by  birth,  by  Baptism, 
by  family  association,  Churchmen.  Of  these  nearly  one- 
fifth  were  deputies  in  actual  attendance  upon  the  early 
General  or  State  Conventions  of  the  Church.  This  no 
doubt  accounts  for  the  striking  resemblances  between 
the  governments  of  the  United  States  and  the  Episcopal 
Church  about  which  we  shall  have  occasion  to  say  more. 


The  unity  which  was  ultimately  effected  in  both 
State  and  Church  was  in  part  the  result  of  a  felt  neces- 
sity for  self-preservation.  In  the  case  of  the  Church  it 
was  seen  to  be  necessary  in  order  that  sufficient  influ- 
ence might  be  exerted  to  secure  the  Consecration  of 
Bishops  by  the  English  Prelates,  and  to  obtain  permis- 
sion from  Congress  for  them  to  take  up  their  abode  in 
the  several  States.  The  Bishops  in  England  were  no 
longer  unwilling  to  consecrate  for  America,  but,  under 
the  laW'S  by  which  their  official  acts  were  regulated, 
they  could  not  proceed  without  special  permissory  leg- 
islation by  Parliament.  This,  owing  partly  to  piques 
connected  with  the  outcome  of  the  late  war,  but  princi- 
pally to  the  great  power  of  the  Puiitan  enemies  of  the 
Church,  was  exceedingly  hard  to  obtain,  and  conse- 
quently required  all  the  influence  that  could  be  exerted 
by  a  united  effort. 

The  want  of  general  cociperation  accounts  for  the 
failure  of  the  Connecticut  Clei-gy  to  secure  Consecration 
from  the  English  Episcopate  for  their  admirable  Bishop 
elect,  Dr.  Samuel  Seabury.  After*  many  months  of  fruit- 
less negotiations,  he  was  at  last  compelled  to  apply  to 
the  non-juring  Bishops  of  Scotland,  who.  having  no  con- 
nection with  the  State,  were  free  to  exercise  the  func- 
tions of  their  Apostolic  office  according  to  discretion. 
They  invested  Dr.  Seabury  with  the  Episcopal  char- 
acter at  Aberdeen  in  an  ui)per  room  on  November  14, 
1784,  Bishops  Kilgour,  Petrie  and  Skinner  being  the 
Consecrators.  "This  ever-memorable  Service  was  per- 
formed," says  an  eye  witness,  "in  the  presence  of  a  con- 
siderable number  of  respectable  Clergymen  and  a  great 
number  of  Laity." 

The  Consecration  of  Dr.  Seabury  took  jlace  about 
two  years  and  a  half  after  the  declaration  of  peace 
and  the  acknowledgment  of  the  independence  of  the 


[  .fa 

II 


280 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


colonies.  It  was  the  most  important  event  which  had 
so  far  happened  in  the  history  of  the  American  Episcopal 
Church.  Its  immediate  and  direct  influence  for  good 
cannot  be  exaggerated.  It  destroyed  the  argument  of 
necessity  by  which  Dr.  White,  and  some  Southern 
Churchmen  sought  to  justify  their  proposition  to  aban- 
don temporarily  the  government  of  the  Church  by  the 
Historic  Episcopate.  There  was  now  a  Bishop  in  the 
States,  and  if  the  canonical  number  three  could  not 
possibly  be  secured,  he  could  by  himself  consecrate 
others,  and  so  perpetuate  the  succession,  and  provide 
for  the  performance  of  all  the  Episcopal  ofl^ces  required 
at  any  time.  If  this  unfortunately  had  been  necessary, 
we  should  have  been  as  well  off  as  the  Mission  which  the 
Church  of  Rome  has  planted  in  the  United  States,  for, 
not  to  mention  other  irregularities,  its  Episcopate  is 
uncanonically  derived  through  one  Consecrator.  Their 
first  Bishop,  Dr.  Carroll,  arrived  in  the  year  1790,  six 
years  after  Bishop  Seabury.  About  twenty  years  after- 
wards, without  regard  to  Canon  law,  which  requires 
that  there  shall  be  at  least  three  Consecrators,  he 
invested  four  others  with  the  Episcopal  office.  Thus 
Episcopalians  have  the  legal  line  of  the  Apostolic  suc- 
cession in  this  country,  while  Romanists  have  not. 
Morover,  we  have  a  decided  further  advantage  in  that 
our  Episcopacy  was  first  on  the  ground.  According  to 
Ecclesiastioal  Law,  we  therefore  constitute  the  American 
branch  of  the  Catholic  Church,  and  they  are  intruding 
schismatics. 

In  any  case,  however,  the  Episcopal  Church  would 
be  the  only  logical  and  legitimate  Catholic  Church  of 
the  land,  because  Americans  are  English-speaking  peo- 
ple, and  this  is  the  historic  Church  of  our  race.  The 
Mother  Church  of  England  was  established  among  our 
British  ancestors  for  centuries  before  they  came  into 


THE    NATIONAL   CHURCH. 


281 


X 


/ 


contact  with  Romanism  through  the  Mission  of  Augus- 
tine, and  she  was  identified  with  the  P^nghsh  nation  for 
fifteen  hundred  years  before  the  birth  of  the  oldest  of 
the  non-Episcopal  bodies.  Indeed  the  very  existence  of 
England  as  a  nation  and  kingdom  is  owing  to  this 
Church  which  was  instrumental  in  uniting  the  seven 
tribes  into  which  Anglo-Saxons  were  divided.  Many  of 
the  Bishoprics  and  other  Ecclesiastical  foundations  are 
older  than  the  Kingdom,  and  have  held  their  lands  and 
endowments  longer  than  the  Crown  has  possessed  its 
property.  There  was  an  Archbishop  of  Canterbury 
three  hundred  years  before  there  was  a  King  of  Eng- 
land. And  not  only  has  she  been  connected  with  our 
race  much  longer  than  any  other  Christian  body,  but 
she  has  now,  and,  in  all  probability,  always  will  have  by 
far  the  greater  number  of  English-speaking  adherents. 
Moreover,  taking  it  altogether,  she  is  as  the  foundation 
of  the  English  nation  and  civilization,  the  most  power- 
ful agency  for  good  the  world  has  ever  seen.  The 
Church  of  England  is,  therefore,  as  preeminently  the 
Catholic  Church  of  our  race,  as  the  Church  of  Rome  is 
that  of  the  Italians,  and  the  Greek  Church  that  of  the 
Eastern  nations. 

Dr.  Seabury's  success  in  obtaining  the  Episcopate, 
and  his  safe  return  were  a  great  joy  to  the  Connecticut 
Clergy.  But  the  Presbyterian  ministers  appeared  to  be 
rather  alarmed,  and  ^'in  consequence  of  his  arrival  as- 
sumed and  gave  to  one  another  the  style  and  title  of 
Bishop  which  formerly  they  reprobated  as  a  remnant 
of  Popery."  Upon  one  occasion  when  the  Bishop  en- 
tered the  hall  where  the  Yale  College  commencement 
exercises  were  going  on,  some  one  suggested  to  the 
President  that  he  be  invited,  out  of  respect  to  his  ofRce, 
to  a  seat  upon  the  stage  among  other  distinguished 
persons;  to  which  it  was  replied:  "We  are  all  Bishops 


282 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


here,  but  if  there  be  room  for  another,  he  can  occupy 
it.*' 

Besides  removing  the  plea  of  necessity  for  the  crea- 
tion of  a  spurious  Episcopacy,  Dr.  Seabury's  Consecra- 
tion by  the  Scottish  Episcopate  apparently  had  the 
effect  of  mortifying  the  English  Bishops,  and  of  inducing 
them  to  redouble  their  efforts  to  secure  the  requisite 
Act  of  Parliament  to  enable  them  to  consecrate  for 
foreign  countries  without  the  administration  of  the 
civil  oath.  In  little  less  than  two  years  and  a  half, 
they  had  not  only  secured  the  enabling  act,  but  under 
it,  had  duly  set  apart  Drs.  Provoost  and  AVhite  as 
Bishops,  respectively,  of  New  York  and  Pennsylvania; 
and  in  a.  d.  1790,  they  Consecrated  Dr.  James  Madison, 
Bishop  of  Virginia,  and  so  the  canonical  number  neces- 
sary to  transmit  the  Apostolic  Succession  was  at  last 
obtained  from  England. 

Still  another  direct  and  important  effect  of  the  timely 
action  taken  by  the  Northern  Clergy  in  securing  a  regu- 
larly conseciated  Bishop,  is  seen  in  the  restraint  put 
upon  the  Southerners,  who  were  for  making  radical 
changes  in  the  Prayer  Book,  and  for  materially  curtail- 
ing the  ancient  rights  and  powers  of  the  American 
Episcopate.  That  such  restraint  was  sorely  needed  will 
be  sufficiently  evident  by  observing  that  it  was  pro- 
posed to  omit  the  Nicene  Creed  from  the  Liturgy,  and 
to  deny  our  Prelates  many  of  the  rights  and  powers 
which  have  been,  by  common  consent,  a  })rerogative  of 
Bishops  from  the  beginning. 

For  some  time  after  the  Consecration  of  Drs.  Pro- 
voost and  White  the  thirteen  State  Churches,  without 
formal  action,  grouped  themselves  into  two  incipient 
Provinces  with  the  Bishop  of  Connecticut  as  the  primate 
of  the  Northern,  and  the  Bishops  of  New  York  and 
Pennsylvania  at  the  head  of  the  Southern.    Owing  to 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


283 


the  unfortunate  difference  of  opinion  respecting  the 
regularity  of  Dr.  Seabury's  Consecration,  and  the  South- 
ern prejudice  against  him,  growing  out  of  his  Chap- 
laincy in  the  British  Army,  and  to  the  dissatisfaction 
of  the  Connecticut  Clergy  and  Bishop  with  what  they 
regarded  as  the  want  of  Churchliness  in  the  Southerners, 
it  seemed  highly  probable  that  two  distinct  and  sep- 
arate Episcopal  Churches  would  be  perpetuated  in 
America.  This  to  all  appearance  would  certainly  have 
been  the  case  but  for  the  wise  management  of  the  Rev. 
Dr.  Parker  and  Bishop  White. 

Dr.  Parker  was  a  distinguished  Boston  Clergyman, 
who  in  A.  D.  J  804  was  consecrated  Bishop  of  Massachu- 
setts, but  died  before  performing  a  single  Episcopal  act. 
In  order  to  accomplish  the  union  of  the  Northern  and 
Southern  Churches,  he  contrived  to  have  the  Rev.  Dr. 
Bass  elected  Bishop  of  Massachusetts,  and  an  appHca- 
tion  made  to  the  General  Convention  of  a.  d.  1789,  for 
his  Consecration  by  Bishops  Seabury,  Provoost  and 
White.  Dr.  Bass  was  not  consecrated  at  that  time  and 
it  is  thought  that  there  was  no  expectation  that  he 
would  be,  but  the  election  and  application  led  to  the 
unanimous  adoption  of  a  resolution  in  which  the  valid- 
ity of  Bishop  Seabury's  Consecration  was  recognized. 
At  an  adjourned  meeting  of  this  Convention,  held  in 
Philadelphia  on  September  29,  1789,  the  Bishop  of 
Connecticut  was  present  with  his  Clerical  deputies.  But 
they  would  not  subscribe  to  the  constitution  previously 
adopted  until  it  had  been  so  far  changed  as  to  allow 
the  House  of  Bishops  their  ancient  vetoing  power,  and 
the  privilege  of  introducing  new  measures.  These 
changes  made,  the  Connecticut  delegation  affixed  their 
signatures,  took  their  seats  in  the  convention,  and  so 
the  Northern  and  Southern  Churches  were  united.  At 
the  next  General  Convention  this  unity  was  effectually 


284 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


cemented  by  the  Consecration  of  the  Rev.  Thomas 
John  Claggett,  D.D.,  as  Bishop  of  Maryland  by  the 
Bishops  of  Connecticut,  New  York,  Pennsyh^ania  and 
Virginia.  Through  the  first  Bishop  of  Maryland, 
though  his  was  the  only  Consecration  in  wliich  Bishop 
Seabury  took  part,  all  American  Bishops  subsequently 
consecrated  are  able  to  trace  their  Apostolic  succession 
along  both  the  Scottish  and  P]nglish  lines. 

Thus  the  connection  between  the  Church  of  England 
and  the  American  Episcopal  Church  is  such  that  the 
Catholicity  of  the  latter  cannot  be  denied  if  it  be  ad- 
mitted  of  the  former.  The  history  of  our  Church  **  in  a 
nut-shell "  is  this :  It  was  founded  in  Jerusalem,  a.  d. 
30,  by  Jesus  Christ ;  was  planted  in  England,  possibly 
by  St.  Paul  or  one  of  his  pupils ;  was  more  or  less  sub- 
ject to  the  usurpations  of  the  Bishop  of  Rome  from  the 
twelfth  to  the  sixteenth  centuries,  then  freed  and  re- 
formed; was  a  mission  of  the  Church  of  P]ngland  in 
America  until  after  the  Reyolution,  when  it  became  au- 
tonomous and  was  called  "Protestant  Episcopal."  It 
therefore  possesses  authority  from  Christ  Himself,  and 
has  continuous  existence  from  the  days  of  the  Apostles. 

Cardinal  Gibbons  in  his  "Faith  of  Our  Fathers" 
says  of  us,  "Theyery  name  you  bear  betrays  your  re- 
cent birth ;  for  whoever  heard  of  a  Baptist  or  an  Episco- 
pal or  any  other  Protestant  Church,  prior  to  the  Refor- 
mation?" To  this  we  reply  that  the  Mother  Church 
has  the  same  name  now  that  she  had  before  the 
Reformation,  EcelesiR  Anglkana^  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. The  French  Roman  Catholic  Dupin,  a  distin- 
guished Doctor  of  the  famous  Sorbonne  Faculty  and 
regius  professor  of  Divinity  who  flourished  some  two 
hundred  years  ago,  opens  a  chapter  in  his  Compendious 
History  of  the  Church,  with  the  question:  "In  what 
state  was  the  Church  of  England,  and  what  passed  there 


THE    NATIONAL   CHURCH. 


285 


in  the  eleventh  century?"  The  Magna  Charta  which 
dates  back  three  hundred  and  fifty  years  before  the  final 
breaking  with  the  Papacy,  speaks  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land and  guarantees  her  liberty  and  the  independence 
of  all  Ecclesiastical  persons.  As  Dr.  Stearns  in  his 
"Faith  of  Our  Forefathers,"  a  crushing  reply  to  Car- 
dinal Gibbons,  says:  "It  was  the  Church  of  England 
then  and  it  is  the  Church  of  England  now;  it  was  'free' 
then;  it  is  'free'  now.  The  'Episcopal'  Church  in  the 
United  States  is  its  legitimate  offspring,  recognized  by 
it  as  such.  Its  name  of 'Episcopal,'  therefore,  does 
not  'betray'  its  'recent  birth;'  nor  is  that  birth 
'recent'  in  any  other  sense  than  that  in  which  the 
birth  of  every  Church,  the  Roman  itself  not  excepted,  in 
a  recently  discovered  country  is  recent." 

Of  course  Roman  controversialists  proceed  upon  the 
hypothesis  that  the  Church  of  England  was  originally  a 
mission  of  the  Church  of  Rome.  But  we  have  seen  that 
this  is  not  true,  and  that  even  if  it  were,  our  right  to 
independence  of  Papal  dominion  would  not  be  affected. 
The  argument  to  the  contrary,  if  carried  out  to  its  log- 
ical conclusions,  would  prove  quite  too  much  for  our 
adversaries.  It  would  subject  Rome  to  Jerusalem  from 
which  all  Churches  have  directly  or  indirectly  sprung. 
Or  if  they  contend  that  as  the  child  is  governed  by  its 
parents  rather  than  the  grandparents,  so  a  mission 
must  be  subjected  to  the  Church  that  planted  it,  rather 
than  to  the  mother  of  all  Churches,  we  point  out  that  by 
this  reasoning  the  Church  of  Rome  should  be  subject  to 
the  Church  of  Greece.  For  it  is  now  a  well-established 
fact  that  the  Greeks  planted  Christianity  in  Rome,  and 
indeed  that  the  Church  there  was  for  more  than  two  cen- 
turies confined  to  a  Grecian  colony.  Bishop  Coxe  says, 
"The  local  Roman  Church  was  for  three  hundred  years  a 
mere  colony  of  Greek  Christianity."   And  Dean  Stanley, 


■"-■^ .' 


•# 


286 


THE    AMERICAJJ    CHURCH. 


ill 


^1 


II  Ms  **Eastern  Church/' writes:  "The  Greek  Church 
reminds  us  of  the  time  when  the  tongue,  not  of  Rome 
but  of  Greece,  was  the  sacred  language  of  Christendom. 
It  was  a  striking  remark  of  the  Emperor  Napoleon, 
that  the  introduction  of  Christianity  itself  was,  in  a  cer- 
tain sense,  the  triumph  of  Greece  over  Rome.  The  early 
Roman  Church  was  but  a  colony  of  Greek  Christians  or 
Grecized  Jews ;  the  earliest  Fatliers  of  the  Western  Church 
wrote  in  Greek ;  the  early  Po[)es  were  not  Italians  but 
Greeks;  the  name  of  Pope  is  not  Latin  but  Greek,  the 
common  and  now  despised  name  of  every  pastor  in  the 
Eastern  Church ;  she  is  the  mother,  and  Rome  the  daugh- 
ter." Canon  Gore  observes  that  "at  an  unknown 
moment,  before  the  middle  of  the  third  century,  the 
Church  of  Rome,  which  up  to  that  time  had  been  Greek 
in  language — alike  in  her  Liturgy  and  her  theology — a 
Greek  colony  in  the  Latin  city,  became,  perhaps  some- 
what suddenly,  a  Latin  Church,  and  in  consequence  of 
this  change  of  language  so  completely  forgot  her  Greek 
past  that  in  the  fourth  century  she  was  ignorant  of  an 
accident  in  her  life  which  the  coincidences  of  modern  dis- 
covery have  laid  open  to  our  eyes.y 

The  unity  so  happily  effected  in  A.  d.  1789,  between 
the  Northern  and  Southei-n  Dioceses,  though  often  more 
or  less  strained,  fortunat el V  has  never  been  broken.  Its 
most  severe  trial  was  at  the  opening  of  our  great  Civil 
War.  The  Southern  delegations  were,  of  course,  not 
present  at  the  General  Convention  which  met  in  the 
year  1862,  but  the  right  of  the  South  to  representation 
was  not  questioned,  seats  were  assigned  them  as  in 
times  past,  and  their  absence  was  not  recognized  by  the 
secretary,  w^ho  never  omitted  their  Dioceses  at  the  roll 
call.  They  had  formed  a  separate  General  Convention 
for  the  Confederate  States,  but  this  was  dissolved  im- 
mediately after  the  war,  and  all  were  represented  as 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


287 


/ 


usual  at  the  first  General  Convention  which  met  there- 
after. This  coming  together  of  Churchmen,  among 
w^hom  were  many  of  the  most  influential  leaders  on  both 
sides,  did  much  more  than  is  commonly  realized  to  help 
forward  the  reconstruction  of  the  Union  and  Government. 


For  many  years  after  the  foundations  of  unity  and 
Catholicity  had  been  laid  and  well  cemented,  the  upbuild- 
ing of  the  superstructure  was  discouragingly  slow.  This, 
in  fact,  continued  to  be  the  case  until  about  thirty  years 
ago.    It  was  due  to  the  operation  of  a  variety  of  causes. 

1.  There  was,  first  of  all,  the  inveterate  puritan- 
ical hatred  of  the  Church,  because  of  those  features  in 
her  system  which  were  groundlessly  denounced  as  the 
* '  rags  of  Popery . ' ' 

2.  There  was  also  the  wide-spread  conviction  that 
the  Episcopal  polity  was  essentially  opposed  to  the 
newly-founded  Republican  form  of  government,  and 
that  consequently  its  introduction  and  toleration 
would  be  a  menace  to  the  recently-acquired  liberties. 
Bishop  White  says:  "I  have  lived  in  days  in  which 
there  existed  such  prejudices  in  our  land  against  the 
name,  and  still  more  against  the  office,  of  a  Bishop, 
that  it  was  doubtful  whether  any  person  in  that  char- 
acter would  be  tolerated  in  the  community."  Even  as 
late  as  the  year  1827,  when  Bishop  Chase  laid  the  mas- 
sive foundations  for  "Old  Kenyon,"  the  people  of  the 
region  about  Gambler  had  the  gravest  suspicions  that 
he  was  building  an  English  fort  for  the  subjugation  of 
the  country  west  of  the  Alleghanies,  and  could  scarce  be 
restrained  from  taking  up  arms  against  the  Bishop  and 
workmen. 

It  is  still  periodically  represented,  to  the  great  preju- 
dice of  the  Episcopal  Church,  that  she  fits  in  with  a 


> 


288 


THE    AMERICAN   CHURCH. 


1; 


n 


Monarchical  rather  than  a  Republican  form  of  gov- 
ernment. In  a  recent  widely-circulated  attack  upon 
the  Episcopal  Church,  it  is  charged  that  she  cannot 
make  good  the  claim  to  be  the  Church  of  the  United 
States,  because  she  "has  not  in  history  been  loyal  to 
Americanism,"  and  "it  is  not  in  its  government 
American." 

So  far  as  the  first  of  these  assertions  is  concerned, 
what  little  foundation  there  is  for  it  exists  in  the  fact 
that  before  the  Independence,  there  being  no  Bishop  in 
this  country,  our  Clergy  either  came  from  England  or 
went  there  for  Ordination,  and  so  their  loyalty  to  the 
Crown  was  pledged  in  the  oath  required  from  the  Eng- 
lish Clergy  by  the  government.  But  though  our  minis- 
try was  thus  embarrassed,  our  laymen  were  as  free 
as  those  of  any  other  communion  to  govern  them- 
selves according  to  their  conviction.  It  is  a  mistake  to 
suppose  that  before  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
opinion  as  to  the  advisability  of  separating  from  the 
mother  country  was  nowhere  divided  except  in  the 
Episcopal  Church,  and  the  colonies  where  she  predom- 
inated. The  Puritans  were  by  no  means  unanimous  for 
an  appeal  to  arms.  In  Massachusetts  a  majority  were 
at  first  opposed  to  the  war ;  a  bill  to  sanction  it  was 
twice  defeated  in  the  Legislature.  In  Connecticut  the 
opposition  w^as  still  greater.  In  New  York  the  parties* 
were  so  equally  divided,  that  when  the  Provincial  Con- 
gress chanced  to  receive  notice  upon  the  same  day  in 
1775  that  General  Washington  was  about  to  cross  the 
Hudson  and  General  Try  on  had  arrived  in  the  harbor, 
they  ordered  the  colonel  commanding  the  militia  so  to 
dispose  his  men  that  he  could  receive  whichever  General 
should  first  arrive,  and  wait  upon  both  as  w^ell  as  cir- 
cumstances would  allow.  Two-thirds  of  the  signers  of 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  were  Episcopalians. 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


289 


One  signer  from  Massachusetts,  Elbridge  Gerry,  after- 
wards Vice-President  of  the  United  States ;  all  but  one 
of  the  signers  from  New  York ;  one  signer  from  New  Jer- 
sey, Francis  Hopkinson,  a  vestryman  and  warden;  all 
the  signers  but  one  from  Pennsylvania;  all  but  one 
from  Delaware;  all  but  one  from  Maryland;  all  the 
signers  from  Virginia;  all  from  North  Carolina;  all 
from  South  Carolina;  and  aH  but  one  from  Georgia, 
were  Episcopalians.  This  immortal  document  was 
mainly  drawn  up  by  Thomas  Jefferson,  who  was,  at 
least,  a  baptized  member  and  a  professed  adherent  of 
the  Episcopal  Church.  He  was,  to  the  day  of  his  death, 
a  constant  attendant  upon  her  Services. 

Washington,  the  Commander-in-chief  of  the  armies, 
and  the  one,  under  God,  to  whom  the  nation  owes  more 
for  its  independence  than  any  other,  was  a  Communicant, 
Vestryman,  and  Lay  Reader  of  this  Church,  and  died  in 
it.  Robert  B.  Livingston,  who, -in  a.  d.  1764,  organized 
the  opposition  to  the  Stamp  Act  in  New  York,  was  an 
Episcopalian.  So  was  Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney,  to 
whom  w^e  owe  the  phrase,  ''milHons  for  defense,  but  not 
a  cent  for  tribute."  He  was  also  the  author  of  that 
clause  of  the  Federal  Constitution  which  provides  that 
no  religious  test  shall  ever  be  required  as  a  qualification 
for  any  oflfice  in  the  United  States.  And  there  was  Pat- 
rick Henry,  whose  famous  speech,  *'  Give  me  liberty  or 
give  me  death,"  went  so  far  in  deciding  Virginia  to  join 
her  sister  colonies  in  the  struggle  for  freedom.  The  debt 
of  gratitude  w^hich  we  owe  this  thrilling  Revolutionary 
orator  cannot  be  appreciated  unless  we  realize  how  in- 
dispensable the  help  of  Virginia  was  to  the  patriot 
cause.  Had  Virginia  stood  aloof,  or  taken  sides  with 
England,  we  should,  in  all  probability,  have  failed. 
John  Morton,  who,  as  chairman,  on  July  2,  1776,  cast 
the  vote  by  which  Pennsylvania  was  committed  to  the 

C.  A.— 19 


mUH 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


Revolution,  was  an  Episcopalian.  So  was  Csesar  Rod- 
ney, who  did  a  similar  service  for  Delaware.  Richard 
Henry  Lee,  of  Virginia,  called  the  Cicero  of  the  Revo- 
lution, who  first  proposed  the  idea  of  a  Congress  for  all 
the  Colonies,  and  introduced  into  Congress  a  resolution 
for  the  Independence  of  the  Colonies,  was  an  Episcopalian. 
On  his  motion,  and  supported  by  his  eloquence,  was 
adopted  the  recommendation  of  the  Committee  which 
drew  up  and  reported  the  Declaration  of  Independence : 
and  in  t^at  instrument  was  embodied  by  Congress  the 
very  words  that  Lee  had  used  in  his  original  resolution : 
"That  these  united  Colonies  are, and  by  right  ought  to 
be,  free  and  independent  States;  that  they  are  absolved 
from  all  allegiance  to  the  British  Crown,  and  that  all 
political  connection  between  them  and  the  State  of 
Great  Britain  is,  and  ought  to  be,  totally  dissolved.'' 
The  declaration  of  rights  adopted  by  the  Virginia  Legis- 
lature, and  embodied  in  the  Declaration  of  Independ- 
ence, was  written  by  George  Mason,  an  Episcopalian.  The 
Declaration  was  first  publicly  read  in  the  State  House 
Square,  Philadelphia,  by  John  Nixon,  an  Episcopalian. 
Peyton  Randolph,  the  first  President  of  the  Ameri- 
can Congress  —  that  very  Congress  which  inaugurated 
and  set  on  foot  the  War  of  the  Revolution  —  was 
an  Episcopalian.  So  was  Rober-t  Morris,  whom  Con- 
gress appointed  superintendent  of  finances,  and  by 
whose  management  of  them,  and  the  pledging  of  his 
own  immense  fortune— an  act  that  reduced  him  to  pov- 
erty—did so  much  to  raise  the  necessary  means  to  keep 
Oiir  armies  in  the  field.  Benjamin  Franklin,  whom  Con- 
gress sent  abroad  as  one  of  its  special  envoys,  and  who, 
by  his  tact  and  persistence,  negotiated  the  treaty  which 
secured  for  us  the  aid  of  France,  without  which  our 
cause  must,  to  all  appearance,  inevitably  have  failed, 
was  nominally  an  Episcopalian. 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


291 


The  lanterns  which  lighted  Paul  Revere's  famous 
ride  to  alarm  the  country  of  the  British  movement 
upon  Lexington  and  Concord  were  hung  in  the  steeple 
of  "Old  Christ's  Episcopal  Church"  by  an  Episcopalian. 
The  Bishop  of  Iowa,  the  learned  and  painstaking  his- 
toriographer of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  to  whose 
writings  I  am  indebted  for  many  of  the  facts  of  this 
lecture,  says  truly :  "  Not  a  field  of  battle,  from  Bunker 
Hill  to  Yorktown,  was  there,  but  was  moistened  by 
Churchmen's  willing  offering  of  life-blood  for  country 
and  freedom."  General  Sullivan,  of  New  Hampshire; 
General  Cobb,  of  Massachusetts;  General  Ward,  of 
Rhode  Island;  Generals  Morgan  and  Lewis,  of  New 
York;  General  Brearly,  of  New  Jersey;  Generals  Ross, 
Cadwallader,  and  ''Mad  Anthony"  Wayne,  of  Penn- 
sylvania; Generals  Sumpter,  Marion,  and  Moultrie,  of 
South  Carolina;  Generals  Gwynnett,  Wymberl}'  Jones, 
and  Walton,  of  Georgia,  were  all  Episcopalians.  So 
were  Generals  Montgomery  and  Mercer,  who  in  turn  so 
gallantly  laid  down  their  lives  at  Quebec  and  Prince- 
ton. Alexander  Hamilton  and  John  Laurens,  the 
first  of  whom  commanded,  and  the  other  led,  the 
storming  party  which  captured  the  first  British  re- 
doubt at  Yorktown,  where  Cornwallis  surrendered 
and  where  the  war  was  practically  ended,  were  P]pis- 
copalians.  Nelson,  the  Governor  of  Virginia,  who 
called  out  the  militia  of  the  lower  part  of  the 
State,  himself  personally  giving  the  State. security  for 
the  funds  to  equip  them,  and  who,  at  the  head  of 
three  thousand  five  hundred  of  them,  marched  to 
Yopktown,  reaching  the  scene  of  action  just  in  time 
to  reinforce  the  army  of  Washington  and  that  of 
our  French  allies,  so  that  they  were  enabled  to  sur- 
round Cornwallis  and  prevent  his  escape,  was  an  Epis- 
copalian. 


mWm 


THE   AMERICAN   CHURCH. 


James  Madison,  afterwards  President  of  the  United 
States,  who,  besides  giving-  the  benefit  of  his  great  mind 
to  the  country  during  the  continuation  of  the  struggle, 
after  its  close,  when  the  States  were  about  to  fall  apaii:, 
was  mainly  instrumental  in  the  formation  of  our  present 
Constitution,  was  an  Episcopalian.  All  of  these  men, to- 
gether with  Monroe,  and  Jay,  and  Marshall,  and  Living- 
stone, and  Rutledge,  and  King,  and  the  Pinkneys,  and  the 
Harrisons,  and  Edmund  Randolph,  and  Lord  Sterling, 
and  "  Lighthorse  Harry  "  Lee,  and  Lillington,  and  Derr, 
and  Troup,  and  William  Samuel  Johnson,  and  hosts  of 
others,  were  Episcopalians.  Francis  Hopkinson,  of  New 
Jersey,  one  of  the  E])iscopalian  signers  of  the  Declara- 
tion, was  the  father  of  Joseph  Hopkinson,  also  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Episcopal  Church,  who  was  the  author  of  our 
National  song,"  Hail  Columbia;  "and  Francis  Scott  Key, 
of  Maryland,  the  writer  of  *'The  Star  Spangled  Ban- 
ner," was  an  Episcopalian. 

As  for  our  Clergy,  when  the  great  crisis  came,  there 
were  only  two  hundred  and  fifty  of  them  in  the  country. 
It  is  true  that  some  of  them,  including  Dr.  Seabury, 
who  afterwards  became  the  first  Bishop  of  Connecticut, 
strongly  sympathized  with  England.  These  for  the 
most  part  either  left  the  country  or  remained  neutral. 
But  a  goodly  proportion  of  our  ministry  must  be 
reckoned  among  the  staunchest  of  patriots.  Of  these 
in  the  North  mav  be  mentioned  the  Rev.  Doctors  Bass 
and  Parker,  both  in  turn,  after  the  war.  Bishops  of  Massa- 
chusetts. These  refused  to  read  prayers  for  the  King 
and  Parliament  and  instead  prayed  for  the  Ameri- 
can cause.  Dr.  Provoost,  of  New  York,  afterwards  first 
Bishop  of  that  State,  was  an  ardent  friend  to  America. 
The  Rev.  William  White  of  Philadelphia,  who  became 
the  first  Bishop  of  Pennsylvania,  also  Doctors  Madison 
and   Smith,  the  first  Bishops  respectively  of  Virginia 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


293 


and  South  Carolina,  took  sides  with  the  Colonies.  The 
Rev.  David  Griffith  of  Virginia,  Rector  of  the  Church 
which  Washington  attended,  did  the  same.  The  Rev. 
Charles  M.  Thurston,  of  Gloucester  County,  Virginia, 
went  into  the  army  as  a  soldier,  rose  to  the  rank 
of  major  and  became  known  as  the  "fighting  par- 
son of  Gloucester."  The  Rev.  Peter  Muhlenburg,  of 
Woodstock,  who  had  been  a  soldier  before  he  became 
a  Clergyman,  entered  the  army  as  Colonel  of  the  8th 
regiment  of  Virginia  and  afterwards  rose  to  be  a 
brigadier-general. 

A  graphic  account  is  preserved  of  the  leaving  of  the 
pulpit  for  the  field  by  Mr.  Muhlenburg.  Having  procured 
a  colonel's  commission  from  General  Washington,  he 
proceeded  on  a  Sunday  to  Church,  and,  after  a  patriotic 
sermon,  took  leave  of  his  congregation  in  the  following 
words :  "  There  is  a  time  for  all  things — a  time  to  preach 
and  a  time  to  pray ;  but  there  is  also  a  time  to  fight,  and 
that  is  now  come."  He  then  gave  them  his  benediction, 
and  throwing  back  his  gown  discovered  to  them  his  mil- 
itary uniform.  We  may  well  leave  the  poet  Read  to  tell 
the  remainder  of  this  dramatic  story  in  the  closing  verses 
of  one  of  the  most  stirring  poems  in  the  English  language : 

A  moment  there  was  awful  pause, — 
When  Berkley  cried,  "Cease,  traitor!  cease! 
God's  temple  is  the  house  of  peace!" 

The  other  shoute^,  "^'ay,  not  so, 
When  God  is  with  our  righteous  cause ; 
His  holiest  places  then  are  ours, 
His  temples  are  our  forts  and  towers, 

That  frown  upon  the  tyrant  foe; 
In  this,  the  dawn  of  Freedom's  day, 
There  is  a  time  to  fight  and  pray!"  '  . 

And  now  before  the  open  door  — 

The  warrior  Priest  had  ordered  so — 
The  enlisting  trumpet's  sudden  roar 


2M  THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 

Rang  through  the  chapel,  o'er  and  o'er, 

Its  long  reverberating  blow, 
So  loud  and  clear,  it  seemed  the  ear 
Of  dusty  death  must  wake  and  hear. 
And  there  the  startling  drum  and  fife 
Fired  the  living  with  fiercer  life; 
While  overhead,  with  wild  increase, 
Forgetting  its  ancient  toll  of  peace. 

The  great  bell  swung  as  ne'er  before; 
It  seemed  as  it  would  never  cease; 
And  every  word  its  ardor  flung 
From  off  its  jubilant  iron  tongue 

Was,  "War!  War!  War!*' 

"Who  dares"  —  this  was  the  patriot's  cry, 
As  striding  from  the  desk  he  came, — 

"Come  out  with  me,  in  Freedom's  name, 
For  her  to  live,  for  her  to  die?" 
A  hundred  hands  flung  up  reply, 
A  hundred  voices  answered  "I!" 

Mr.  Muhlenbiirg,  having  led  three  hundred  brave  vol- 
unteers to  the  front,  remained  with  the  army  till  the 
close  of  the  war,  and  then  engaged  in  civil  pursuits  until 
his  death  in  1807.  There  was  also  the  patriot,  the  Rev. 
Charles  Pettigrew,  of  North  Carolina.  In  South  Caro- 
lina, where  at  the  breaking  out  of  the  war,  there  were 
only  twenty  Clergymen  of  the  Church,  it  is  said  that  fif- 
teen of  them,  or  three-fourths  of  the  entire  number,  took 
sides  with  .\merica.  Six  of  the  Signers  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence  were  sons  or  grandsons  of  Episco- 
pal Clergymen. 

The  Rev.  Thomas  Duche,  of  Philadelphia,  arrayed 
in  full  canonicals,  offered  the  first  prayer  in  Congress. 
The  following  interesting  reminiscence  of  this  event 
is  preserved  to  us  in  a  letter  to  his  wife  from  the  ven- 
erable John  Adams.  "When  the  Congress  met,  Mr. 
Cushing  made  a  motion  that  it  should  be  opened  with 
prayer.    It  was  opposed  by  Mr.  Jay,  of  New  York,  and 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


295 


Mr.  Rutledge,  of  South  Carolina,  because  we  were  so 
divided  in  religious  sentiments,  some  Episcopalians, 
some  Quakers,  some  Anabaptists,  some  Presbyterians, 
and  some  Congregation  a  lists,  that  we  could  not  join  in 
the  same  act  of  worship.  Mr.  Samuel  Adams  arose  and 
said,  that  he  was  no  bigot,  and  could  hear  a  prayer 
from  any  gentleman  of  piety  and  virtue,  who  was  at  the 
same  time  a  friend  to  his  country.  He  was  a  stranger 
in  Philadelphia,  but  had  heard  that  Mr.  Duche  deserved 
that  character,  and  therefore  he  moved  that  Mr.  Duche, 
an  Episcopal  Cleigyinan,  might  be  desired  to  read 
prayers  to  Congress  to-morrow  morning.  The  motion 
was  seconded  and  passed  in  the  affirmative.  Mr.  Ran- 
dolph, our  President,  waited  on  Mr.  Duche  and  received 
for  answer  that,  if  his  health  would  permit,  he  certainly 
would.  Accordingly  next  morning  he  appeared  with  his 
clerk,  and  in  his  pontificals,  and  read  several  prayers  in 
the  established  form,  and  then  read  a  psalm  for  the 
seventh  day  of  September,  which  was  the  35th  Psalm. 
You  must  remember  this  was  the  next  morning  after  we 
had  heard  of  the  terrible  cannonade  at  Boston.  It 
seemed  as  if  Heaven  had  ordered  that  psalm  to  be  read 
on  that  morning.  After  this  Mr.  Duche,  unexpectedly 
to  everybody,  struck  out  into  extempore  prayer,  which 
filled  the  bosom  of  every  man  present.  I  must  confess 
I  never  heard  a  better  prayer  or  one  so  well  pronounced. 
Episcopalian  as  he  is,  Dr.  Cooper  himself  never  prayed 
with  such  fervor,  such  ardor,  such  correctness  and 
pathos,  and  in  language  so  elegant  and  sublime  for 
America,  for  Congress,  for  the  Province  of  Massachusetts 
Bay,  especially  the  town  of  Boston.  It  had  excellent 
eflbct  upon  everybody  here.  I  must  beg  of  you  to 
read  the  psalm.  [''Plead  Thou  my  cause  O  God,  with 
them  that  strive  with  me,  and  fight  Thou  against 
them   that   fight   against   me."]     It  was   enough  to 


296 


THE  AMERICAN  CHURCH. 


THE  NATIONAL  CHURCH. 


297 


I '  I 


I' ' 


melt  a  heart  of  stone.  I  saw  the  tears  gnnh  into  the 
eyes  of  the  old,  grave,  pacific  Quakers  of  Philadelphia." 
Dr.  William  White,  mentioned  above,  was  elected  as 
the  first  regular  Chaplain  of  Congress.  I  do  not  remem- 
ber ever  reading  of  any  l*uritan  ministers  who  did  more 
for  the  cause  of  liberty  than  these  Clergymen  of  the 
Church.  None  of  them,  so  far  as  my  knowledge  extends, 
took  up  arms.  They  may,  in  some  cases,  have  done  more 
patriotic  preaching  than  our  Clergy,  but  they  certainly 
did  not  do  as  much  fighting  of  which  record  is  made. 

During  the  late  Civil  War,  the  Northern  members  of 
the  Episcopal  Church  certainly  manifested  as  much 
patriotism  as  those  of  any  other  body  of  Christians. 
This  will  hardly  be  denied  in  the  face  of  the  notable  fact 
that  the  Bishop  of  Ohio  was  sent  by  the  Noi-thern  gov- 
ernment to  England  to  dissuade  the  nobility  from 
acknowledging  and  favoring  the  Confederacy,  and  who, 
by  accomplishing  a  mission  so  important  to  the  Union, 
earned  the  lasting  gratitude  of  his  fellow  countrymen. 
Surely  the  reader  will  perceive  the  injustice  of  charging 
the  Episcopal  Church  with  a  lack  of  patriotism,  when 
he  is  told  that  Mc'Ilvaine,  Seward,  Chase,  Stanton, 
Wells,  Blair,  Dennison,  Columbus  Delano,  Henry  Win- 
ter Davis,  Edmunds,  David  Davis,  Isaac  F.  Redfield, 
Jay  Cooke,  Fremont,  Mead,  Schofield,  Curtis,  Hancock, 
Porter,  Craven,  and  other  distinguished  Union  patriots, 
a  complete  list  of  whom  would  fill  several  pages,  were 
Episcopalians.  The  authoress  of  "  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin," 
a  book  which,  perhaps,  next  to  the  daily  pi*es8,  did 
more  than  anything  else  to  fire  patriotism  and  the 
/  spirit  of  war  in  the  rank  and  file  of  the  North,  and,  by 
so  doing,  contributed  immeasurably  towards  preventing 
I  the  downfall  of  the  Union,  is  an  Episcopalian.  How 
\;an  a  Church  which  enrolls  the  above  names  among  her 
members,  names  which  represent  so  many  pillars  of  lib- 


k 


erty  and  union,  be  justly  stigmatized  with  a  lack  of 
patriotism?  A  regard  to  that  Scriptural  precept  which 
requires  honor  to  be  given  to  whom  it  is  due,  would 
surely  place  the  Episcopal  Church  far  up,  if  not  at 
the  very  head  of  American  patriot-producing  institu- 
tions. 

The  only  conceivable  ground  for  the  misconception 
regarding  the  patriotism  of  Episcopalians,  is  found  in 
the  fact  that  the  Episcopal  Church  steadfastly  refuses 
to  meddle  in  politics.  Her  policy  is  to  leave  the  govern- 
ment in  the  hands  of  those  whom  God,  by  the  voice  of 
the  people,  has  charged  with  its  awful  responsibilities, 
and  to  hold  up  their  hands  by  the  loyalty  and  the 
prayers  of  her  members.  The  Church  that  teaches  her 
adherents,  without  regard  to  political  and  other  prefer- 
ences, to  pray  at  every  Service  for  the  President,  and  all 
other  civil  authorities,  and  appoints  a  prayer  to  be 
said  every  Sunday  during  the  session  of  Congress,  is 
\essentially  a  patriotic  Church,  and  what  wonder  is  it 
that  so  many  of  her  sons  have  been  among  the  most 
noble  and  distinguished  of  our  patriots. 


/"In  reply  to  the  charge  that  ''the  Episcopal  Church 
is  not  in  its  government  American,"  one  of  our  Clergy- 
men pointed  out  that  our  critic  was  mistaken  as  to  the 
essential  characteristic  of  the  United  States  govern- 
ment, which  is  not  the  individualism  that  finds  free  play 
in  the  Congregational  Denomination,  but  the  represen- 
I  tative  policy  which  prevails  in  the  Episcopal  Church. 
The  critic's  idea  of  American  government  is  a  town 
meeting,  a  little  affair  in  which  each  individual  expresses 
his  opinion  and  choice  directly.  Our  idea  of  American 
government  is  that  of  a  nation  in  which  the  people 
voice  their  choice  through  representative  assemblies  or 


V." 


298 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


persons.  Will  it  be  contended  that  the  American  o;ov- 
ernment  is  not  a  representative  gjovernment?" 

The  Episcopal  Church  is  as  effectually  safe-guarded 
ajifiinst  Monarchicalisni  as  the  United  States,  if  any 
thing  more  so.  Though  our  Bishops,  because  of  their 
exalted  position  as  successors  of  the  Apostles  and  their 
personal  worth,  are  greatly  honored,  yet  they  do  not,  as 
the  heads  of  their  resj^ective  Dioceses,  exercise  as  much 
authority  as  the  Governors  of  our  States ;  nor  does  our 
Primate  enjoy  the  vetoing  power  with  which  the  Presi- 
dent of  the  ITnited  States  is  invested.  The  Laity  are 
more  fully  represented  in  our  Diocesan  Synods  than  the 
Clergy,  and  the  Lower  House  of  our  Triennial  General 
Convention  is  composed  of  Clergymen  and  Laymen  in 
equal  numbers.  These  generally  vote  together,  but  a 
representative  of  either  order  may  at  any  time  call  for 
a  division,  and  so  it  becomes  possible  that  a  measure 
which  has  passed  the  House  of  Bishops,  and  also  re- 
ceived the  majority  of  clerical  votes  in  the  House  of 
Deputies,  may  yet  fail  of  becoming  a  law,  because 
among  the  Lay  delegates  there  is  one  more  against 
than  for  it.  This  is  a  remarkable  departure  from  the 
Mother  Church,  in  whose  Convocations  the  Laity  have 
no  voice,  and  can  l>e  accounted  for  only  by  the  fact  that 
in  all  things  of  human  ordering,  the  Church's  gOTarn- 
ment  was  modeled  by  true  sons  of  America. 

The  principles  which  prevail  in  the  government  of 
the  Church  at  l^rge  are  also  carried  out  in  our  Parishes. 
Though  the  Rector  is  the  official  head  of  the  parochial 
organization,  his  word  is  not  law  except  when  it  relates 
to  the  Services  and  Discipline;  and  even  in  these  mat- 
ters he  is  obliged  to  have  reference  to  the  regulations 
of  the  General  Convention  and  Diocesan  Synods,  in 
which,  as  we  have  seen,  the  Laity  as  well  as  the  Clergy 
have  a  voice.    Besides  the  Layman,  who  feels  that  he 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


299 


\ 


\ 


has  a  just  grievance  against  his  Rector,  is  alwa^^s  at  lib- 
erty to  appeal  to  the  Bishop,  The  Vestry,  elected 
by  the  supporters  of  the  Parish,  have  charge  of  the 
property  and  finances.  In  the  case  of  a  vacancy  in 
the  Rectorship  they  fill  it  with  the  approval  of  the 
Bishop. 

'*  While,"  as  Bishop  Perry  observes,  '*our  Orders  are 
Apostolic  and  unchangeable,  as  coming  from  above- 
made,  as  of  old  the  Tabernacle  of  Israel  was,  after  the 
pattern  given  in  the  Mount— our  organization  is  of 
human  origin  and  adaptation,  and  is  just  such  as  might 
be  expected  from  Churchmen  who  were  leaders  and  fram- 
ers  of  government  both  in  Church  and  State  a  century 
ago.  Thus  is  it  that  we  are  at  once,  in  structural  being 
\and  government,  thoroughly  republican,  distinctively 
American— the  Church  of  the  people,  the  Church  for  the 
people.  And  the  work  of  our  Fathers,  both  in  Church 
and  State,  has  now  the  approval  and  indorsement  of 
more  than  a  hundred  successful  years." 

I  cannot  better  conclude  this  necessarily  somewhat 
lengthy  digression  for  the  purpose  of  answering  the 
charge  of  un-Americanism  than  by  calling  attention  to 
what  Henry  Clay  had  to  say  upon  the  subject.  This 
great  statesman  and  orator  did  not  identify  himself 
with  any  form  of  organized  Christianity  until  late  in 
life.  He  is  reported  to  have  said  about  the  time  of 
his  Baptism,  that  among  the  considerations  which 
induced  him  to  become  a  member  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  rather  than  of  any  other,  was  the  fact  that  years 
of  observation  and  study  had  led  him  to  the  conclusion 
that  the  stability  of  our  government  depends  upon  the 
perpetuation  of  two  institutions.  "One  of  these,  and 
the  most  important  of  the  two,"  said  Mr.  Clay,  "is  the 
Episcopal  Church,  and  the  other  is  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States." 


I  'I 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 

3.  Ag^afn,  tlie  Revolutionary  War  was  especially  dis- 
astrous to  the  Church.  As  we  have  seen,  many  of  its  al- 
ready very  inadequate  Clerical  force  had  abandoned  the 
country.  In  the  four  colonies  of  Connecticut,  New  York, 
New  Jersey  and  Pennsylvania  there  were  at  the  close  of 
the  war  no  less  than  seventy  vacant  Churches.  Those 
Clergymen  who  remained,  in  the  majority  of  cases  came 
out,  after  eight  long  years  of  privation  and  anxiety, 
broken  in  health  and  greatly  impoverished,  if  not  abso- 
lutely destitute.  The  Churches  and  rectories  very 
generally  had  been  destroyed  or  desecrated,  and  al- 
lowed to  fall  into  ruins.  When  the  war  began,  Vir- 
ginia had  one  hundred  and  sixty-four  Churches  and 
ninety-one  Clergymen.  At  the  end,  ninety-five  Churches 
had  been  destroyed,  and  only  twenty-eight  of  the 
Clergy  remained.  Moreover,  the  glebe  lands  and  endow- 
ments were,  after  a  time,  confiscated.  The  misfortunes 
which  befell  Virginia  were  common  throughout  the 
South. 

4.  About  this  time  the  Chui*l!h  was  greatly  weakened 
by  the  creeping  in  of  heresies.  King's  Chapel,  the 
oldest  foundation  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Boston, 
was  lost  to  the  Unitarians.  This,  however,  was  due  as 
much  to  the  scattering  of  Churchmen  by  the  Revolu- 
tionary storm  as  to  the  ravages  of  heresy. 

5.  Again,  our  immigration  since  the  Revolution  has 
been  almost  wholly  from  the  non-Episcopal  and  Roman 
Catholic  elements  of  England,  Ireland  and  Scotland. 
And  from  all  the  hosts  that  have  come  to  us  from  con- 
tinental Europe,  we  have  received  no  accessions.  The 
principal  part  of  the  Roman  constituency  is  of  foreign 
birth.  The  papers  frequently  convey  the  information 
that  one  hundred  thousand  souls  have  been  added  to 
their  Communion  within  a  given  year.  This  is  astonish- 
ing to  all  that  are  not  aware  that  about  this  number 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


301 


of  Romanists  have  been  immigrating   to   the  United 
States  from  year  to  year.    But  for  this,  the  growth 

f  would  have  been  the  other  way.  All  the  chief  bodies  of 
Protestants,  except  the  Episcopal  Church,  have  had 
thousands  and  tens  of  thousands  of  accessions  by  im- 
migration. Our  adherents  are  almost  wholly  Amer- 
ican born.  The  great  majority  of  English  immigrants 
are  Dissenters,  and  so  do  not  contribute  to  our  up- 
^  building,  though,  fortunately,  their  removal  weakens 
the  enemies  of  the  Mother  Church,  who  are  bent  upon 
disestablishment  and  confiscation.  The  fact  that  this 
Church  has  profited  so  little  by  immigration  is,  in 
itself,  almost  sufficient  to  explain  our  comparatively 
slow  growth. 

6.  Moreover,  we  became  an  independent  Church,  and 
started  out  on  our  career  as  such,  just  about  the  time 
of  the  great  Methodist  schism,  and  the  beginning  of  the 
revival  system,  which  for  fifty  years  swept  very  nearly 
everything  before  it.  In  the  religious  excitement,  which 
in  one  resistless  wave  after  another  rolled  over  the 
country,  the  Church  was  almost  submerged  and  lost 
sight  of,  and  hundreds  of  thousands  who,  under  nor- 
mal conditions,  would  have  remained  in  this  Church,  or 
would  have  come  into  it,  were  floated  into  one  or  an- 
other of  the  Denominations. 

7.  Even  the  Civil  War  brought  more  disaster  to  the 
Episcopal  Church  than  to  any  other  Christian  body  in 
the  land.  "The  reason,"  observes  a  Southern  Clergy- 
man, "is  plain.  The  Churchmen  of  ante-bellum  davs 
were  the  social  as  well  as  the  political  ruling  class  of  the 
South.  The  struggle  shattered  their  fortunes,  and  left 
many  a  family  of  former  affluence  in  comparative  pen- 
ury. Consequently,  many  rural,  and  not  a  few  village, 
Churches,  are  to-day  in  ruins,  or  bearing  every  mark  of 
poverty  and  neglect,  occasionally  sheltering  a  dispirited 


\\ 


302 


THE  AMERICAN  CHURCH. 


THE  NATIONAL  CHURCH. 


coiigregation,  Tafniy   strugo^ling  to  repair  the  waste 
places  of  the  local  Zion.'' 

8.  But  perhaps  the  most  potent  of  many  causes 
which  operated  a«:ain8t  the  Church's  growth,  was  the 
timid  and  apologetic  policy  pursued  for  the  most  part 
by  her  representatives,  until  about  fifty  years  ago.  Then 
the  principles  of  Bishops  Seabury  and  Hobart  began 
to  prevail,  and  the  Church  was  represented  by  an  ever- 
widening  circle  in  her  true  character  as  a  veritable 
branch  of  the  "One,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Church  of  Christ."  The  adoption  of  this  policy  by  a 
considerable  number  of  our  Clergy,  marks  a  new  and 
brighter  era  in  the  history  of  the  American  Episcopal 
Church.  This  is  also  true  in  respect  to  the  English 
Church  in  which  the  movement  was  started.  The 
contrast  between  the  phenomenal  growth  of  both 
Churches  in  every  element  of  strength  since  the  change, 
and  their  languishing  condition  before  it,  should  be 
a  perjietual  admonition  to  Chun^hmen  never  again 
to  commit  the  fatal  mistake  of  allowing  the  impres- 
sion to  go  abroad  that  the  P^piscopal  Church  is 
simply  one  of  the  post-Reformation  sects,  whose  chief 
distinguishing  features  are  the  Prayer  Book  and  sur- 
plice. 


^  But  for  a  long  time  the  revi^ 
jberemonies  of  the  Primitive  CI 


ival  of  the  doctrines  and 
Church  was  stoutly  and 
persistently  resisted  by  a  formidable  party  in  tlieChurch 
which  styled  itself  ''Evangelical."  Its  representatives 
were  ever  loudly  lamenting  and  denouncing  what  they 
w^ere  pleased  to  characteiize  as  the  Medijpval  and 
Romanizing  tendency  of  those  who  called  themselves 
Anglo-CatholicR.  A  few  of  the  more  radical  among 
them   finally   grew  so  d^perate  that  they  could  no 


303 


longer  defer  the  secession  which  for  years  had  seemed 
inevitable.  Accordingly,  in  December,  1878,  under  the 
leadership  of  the  Assistant  Bishop  of  Kentucky,  the  so- 
called  Reformed  Episcopal  Church  was  organized.  It 
was  expected  on  all  hands  that  there  would  be  a  gen- 
eral exodus  of  the  ''Evangelicals."  This  expectation 
was,  however,  never  realized.  Only  a  handful  of  the 
Clergy,  and  in  proportion,  fewer  of  the  Laity  Avent  out, 
and  many  of  both  after  a  short  sojourn  returned.  It  is 
known  that  the  disappointment  and  chagrin  of  Bishop 
Cummins  were  very  great,  and  it  is  generally  believed 
that  they  caused  his  premature  death  to  which  his  fol- 
lowers attribute  in  great  measure  the  almost  complete 
failure  of  their  ill-advised  and  unjustifiable  schism. 
Though  it  was  begun  with  forty  ministers,  there  are 
now,  after  twenty  years,  only  one  hundred  and  twenty, 
not  a  few  of  whom  are  dissatisfied.  One  of  the  most 
distinguished  of  Bishop  Cummins'  original  adherents 
deplores  the  present  condition  of  things,  and  asks  an 
explanation  of  its  cause.  He  says  that  "a  portion  of 
our  Church  has  been  impressed  from  the  beginning  of 
our  present  system  with  its  inherent  defects." 

As  long  as  the  Church  was  generally  believed  to  be 
only  one  among  the  sects,  it  was  naturally  the  most 
despised  and  least  progressive  of  them  all.  The  real 
sects  flourished  while  the  Church  languished ;  had  she 
continued  in  this  false  attitude,  she  would  doubtless  be 
even  now  an  inconsiderable  force  among  the  many  De- 
nominations in  this  country.  Our  ancestors  of  a  hun- 
dred years  ago  beheld  with  astonishment  the  progress 
of  modern  Sectarianism,  which  was  then  in  all  its  mar- 
velous vigor,  and  they,  perhaps  naturally  enough, 
jumped  to  the  conclusion  that  the  weakness  and  waning 
state  of  the  Church  were  chiefly  due  to  what  her  ene- 
mies ignorantly  represented  as  l^opish  ceremonies  and 


104 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


J  '■ 


doctrines.  They  did  not  perceive,  and  nnder  the  cir- 
cumstances could  hardly  be  expected  to  have  perceived, 
that  the  conditions  of  Sectarian  and  Church  growth 
are  essentially  different.  The  sect  in  all  ages,  like  the 
cornstalk,  shoots  up  quickly  and  bears  its  fruit  in  a 
summer;  but  the  Church,  resembling  the  oak  in  her 
growth,  advances  slowly  and  remains  through  frost 
and  sunshine,  and  from  generation  to  generation. 


Our  growth,  since  we  have  recognized  and  proclaimed 
the  true.  Divine  and  Catholic  character  of  the  American 
Episcopal  Church,  has  been  scarcely  less  remarkable 
than  that  of  the  most  prosperous  forms  of  Sectarianism 
in  their  palmiest  days.  In  fact,  we  are  outstripping 
them  in  various  parts  of  the  country  where  it  once 
seemed  as  if  we  could  never  get  a  foot-hold.  It  has  been 
acknowledged  that,  if  the  Church  continues  her  present 
rate  of  growth  for  another  decade,  she  will  be  the 
strongest  body  of  non-Roman  Christians  in  New  Eng- 
land itself.  And  it  has  been  admitted  by  distinguished 
Denominational  ministers  that  the  Church  throughout 
the  country  is,  everything  considered,  making  more 
rapid  and  substantial  progress  than  any  of  the  Denom- 
inations. 

In  every  State  and  Territory,  the  percentage  of  in- 
crease for  the  period  covered  by  the  last  census,  was  all 
that  could  have  been  expected,  and  in  the  majority  of 
them  was  astonishing  even  to  those  among  us  who  are 
most  sanguine  and  confident  touching  the  future  of  the 
Church.  In  forty-two  of  our  forty-nine  States  and  Terri- 
tories, our  increase  has  been  from  thirty  to  more  than 
six  hundred  per  cent.  The  population  of  the  United 
States  during  the  same  period  increased  less  than 
twenty-five  per  cent.    And  not  only  has  the  general 


THE    NATIONAL   CHURCH. 


305 


growth  of  the  Church  far  exceeded  proportionately  that 
of  the  population  at  large,  but  it  is  also  greater  than 
that  of  any  other  religious  body  in  particular. 

Moreover,  there  is  a  very  general  looking  towards  us 
with  favor.  It  is  said  by  those  who  are  in  a  position  to 
know,  that  in  our  large  cities,  where  the  Church  is  well 
represented,  out  of  ten  persons  who  change  from  one 
Denomination  to  another,  nine  of  them  come  into  the 
Episcopal  Church.  Among  those  recently  confirmed  in 
thirty  of  the  New  York  City  parishes,  there  were 
over  four  hundred  who  had  been  born  and  educated  in 
the  several  Denominations.  In  one  of  the  classes  alone 
there  were  one  Jew,  one  Baptist,  two  French  Protes- 
tants, three  Unitarians,  three  Congregationalists,  seven 
Methodists,  nineteen  Romanists,  twenty-eight  Presby- 
terians and  fifty-two  Lutherans.  This  drift  is  rapidly 
making  us  the  dominant  body  of  Christians  in  all  large 
centers  of  population. 

One  of  the  most  remarkable  and  encouraging 
features  of  our  growth  is  the  number  of  able  ministers 
from  the  various  Denominations  who  are  coming  to  us. 
Our  accessions  from  their  ranks  now  amount  to  about 
forty  annually,  and  the  rate  is  increasing  from  year  to 
year.  It  is  estimated  that  within  the  last  thirtv  vears 
fully  fiiteen  hundred  Denominational  preachers  have  been 
rec^eived  into  our  ministry.  Many  of  these  were  the 
foremost  men  of  their  respective  Denominations.  A 
number  of  them  have  become  Bishops  among  us  and 
Rectors  of  our  largest  parishes. 

This  remarkable  drift  towards  the  Episcopal  Church 
is,  of  course,  observed  by  the  Denominational  leaders 
who  try  to  account  for  it.  A  Presbyterian  writer  thinks 
that  it  is  due  to  "the  attractiveness  of  the  Prayer  Book 
Worship."  A  Lutheran  believes  that  "the  possession 
of  the  Historic  Episcopate  explains  it."    But  a  New 

C.  A —20 


306 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


V 


York  Baptist  minister  ''  hits  the  nail  on  the  head"  when, 
after  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  his  Denomina- 
tion has  increased  only  thirty-six  per  cent,  in  the  Em- 
pire State,  while  the  Episcopal  Church  has  j>:ained  one 
hundred  and  forty-one  per  cent,  in  the  same  period, 
he  says :  "  The  true  explanation  is  to  bef  found  in  the  con- 
fidence, assurance,  and  couragre  of  the  Episcopal  lead- 
ers. They  believe  that  theirs  is  'the  Church,'  and  are 
not  slow  to  assert  their  belief.  That  very  assurance, 
and  the  exclusiveness  which  comes  from  it,  is  the  tower 
of  their  strength.  They  are  not  ashamed  of  their  belief; 
they  have  the  courage  of  their  convictions,  and  a  large 
part  of  the  world  takes  them  at  their  own  estimate. 
Here  is  the  secret  of  their  power."  In  commenting  upon 
tliese  words,  the  editor  of  one  of  our  religious  papers 
rightly  says:  ''  This  is  a  clear-headed,  and,  we  believe, 
substantially  a  true  judgment.  It  goes  to  prove  two 
things  :  first,  that  many  thinking  people  are  in  search 
of '  the  Church ;'  second,  that  those  are  hardly  true  sons 
of  the  Church  who  seek  to  take  away  this  bulwark  by 
decrying  or  minimizing  her  Catholic  claims,  or  by  enter- 
ing into  entangling  alliances,  which  would  remove  the 
exclusiveness    which    legitimately    results    from    such 

claims." 

It  is  popularly  supposed  that  since  the  Oxford  re- 
vival, almost  as  many  go  from  the  Episcopal  Church  to 
the  Eoman  Communion  as  come  to  her  from  the  sev- 
eral Protestant  Denominations.  And  for  some  time 
after  its  beginning  there  was,  it  must  be  confessed, 
much  ground  for  fear  that  this  would  be  the  case.  As 
Dr.  McConnell  remarks:  '*In  England,  as  a  direct  con- 
sequence of  the  revived  Ecclesiasticism,  such  great 
names  as  Newman,  Manning,  Oakley,  Faber,  Wilber- 
force,  Palmer,  and  Ward  passed  from  the  Church's  rolls 
to  the  lists  of  Rome.   In  America,  Bishop  Ives,  of  North 


THE    NATIONAL    CHURCH. 


307 


Carolina,  and  a  group  of  men  of  lesser  station,  but 
greater  character,  followed  in  the  same  path.  But  the 
general  apostasy  for  which  many  looked  did  not  occur. 
The  facts  seemed  to  point  to  a  different  outcome,  as  the 
event  has  shown.  The  sum  total  of  the  losses  to  the 
Roman  Catholic  Church  in  Great  Britain  up  to  a.d. 
1888,  including  Clergy  and  Laity,  men  and  women,  fall 
below  two  thousand.  That  is  to  say,  an  average  of 
thirty-five  persons  per  year  have  left  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land for  Rome  dining  th#  last  sixty  years.  One  large 
parish  Church  w^ould  hold  them  all,  living  or  dead." 

Nor  is  it  speaking  beyond  bounds  to  say  that  for 
every  one  who  went  to  Rome  five  have  come  from  her 
to  us.  Bishop  Perry,  of  Iowa,  says  that  during  his 
Episcopate  of  eigliteen  years,  there  have  been  received 
into  the  Church  in  Iowa  from  the  Roman  obedience  over 
seven  hundred  adults  who  have  exchanged,  intelligently, 
and  with  a  full  knowledge  of  what  they  were  doing,  a 
false  Catholicity  for  a  true.  ^^  In  the  same  time,"  the 
Bishop  adds,  "we  have  lost  to  Rome,  so  far  as  I  can 
learn,  less  than  half  a  dozen  individuals."  The  Bishop 
of  Maryland  reports  that  in  his  average  Confirmation 
classes  there  are  about  thirty  converts  from  Romanism 
and  the  same  number  from  the  Methodists  each  month. 
"The  tide   of  return,"   says  he,  "appears  a  steady 


one. 


j> 


But  increase  in  numbers  does  not  much  more  than 
half  tell  the  story.  The  growth  of  the  Church  must 
also  be  measured  by  her  influence  upon  the  Denomina- 
tions about  her.  During  her  prostrate  condition 
Methodism  moulded  all  Protestantism  to  her  own  form. 
But  this  is  no  longer  the  case.  Methodism  is  now  herself 
putting  on  the  external  garments  of  the  Church.  The 
general  observance  of  Christmas  and  Easter  by  special 
services  and  decorations;  the  responsive  readings  and 


308 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


I 


anthems  and  the  growing  elaboration  of  ritual;  the 
catechising  of  children,  and  the  reception  of  them  into 
full  membership  at  the  tender  age  of  twelve  years  and 
even  younger ;  the  Gothic  architecture,  pipe  organ  and 
stained  glass— all  these  things  and  much  more,  partic- 
ularly the  decline  of  the  revival  system,  bear  witness  to 
the  fact  that  the  influence  of  the  Church  is  becoming 
more  and  more  dominant. 

Even  in  old  Presbyterian,  Puritanical  Scotland,  we 
find  a  remarkable  illustration  of  the  growing  ascend- 
ency of  Church  ideas.    A  numl)er  of  the  most  prominent 
ministers  in  the  established  Kirk,  including  such  famous 
men   as  Milligan,  Macleod,    Lang,  Boyd  and  Cooper 
have  organized  **The  Church  Society,"  the  special  ob- 
jects  of  which    are   "(1)  The   consistent  affirmation 
on    the    same    basis    of    the    supernatural    life    and 
Heavenly  calling  of  the  Church.    (2)  The  fostering  of 
a  due  sense  of  the  historic  continuity  of  the  Church 
from  the  first.    (3)  The  maintaining  of  the  necessity 
of  a  valid  Ordination  to  the  Holy  Ministry,  and  the 
celebration  in  a  befitting  manner  of  the  Rite  of  Ordi- 
nation.   (4)  The  assertion  of  the  efficacy  of  the  Sacra- 
ments.   (5)  The  promotion  of  the  religious  education 
and  pastoral  care  of  the  young  on  the  basis  of  Holy 
Baptism.    (6)  The  restoration  of  the  Holy  Communion 
to  its  right  place  in  relation  to  the  worship  of  the 
Church,  and  to  the  Spiritual  life  of  the  Baptized.    (7) 
The  revival  of  daily  Service  where  practicable.    (8)  The 
observance,  in  its  main  features,  of  the  Christian  year. 
(9)  The  deepening  of  a  penitential  sense  of  the  sin  and 
I^eril  of  schism."     "Now  it  seems  to  me,"  says  an  irate 
Scotchman  from  whom  we   quote   the  above,  *'that 
though  the  promoters  of  this  movement  do  not  say  so, 
the  whole  thing  smacks  of  High  Churchism.    What  do 
you  say  to  expressions  like  'Catholic  Doctrine,'  'His- 


THE    NATIONAL   CHURCH. 


309 


toric  continuity  of  the  Church,'' Valid  Ordination  of  the 
Holy  Ministry,'  'befitting  celebration  of  the  Kite  of  Or- 
dination,' 'efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,'  'basis  of  Holy 
Baptism,'  'Holy  Communion  in  relation  to  the  Spirit- 
ual life  of  the  Baptized,'  'revival  of  daily  Service,' 
'  observance  of  the  Christian  year '  and  '  sin  and  peril 
of  schism?'" 

Romanists  sometimes  claim  that  the  striking  chatige 
which  has  come  over  Denominationalism  is  due  to  the 
influence  of  their  Church.  But  there  is  really  nothing  in 
this.  Owing  in  part  to  the  origin  and  character  of  the 
Roman  constituency,  and  also  in  part  to  the  detestation 
in  which  the  whole  Ultramontane  system  is  still  held 
by  Denominationalists,  these  representatives  of  the  ex- 
tremes have  very  little  social  and  less  religious  inter- 
course. But  Episcopalians  and  Denominationalists  have 
always  mingled  freely  in  all  things  except  religion.  And 
as  our  members  have  been  a  great,  if  not  the  dominant, 
influence  in  the  social,  political  and  commercial  w^orld, 
it  is  evident  that  they  have  had  much  to  do  directly  and 
indirectly  in  bringing  about  the. change  under  considera- 
tion. Take,  for  example,  the  striking  change  in  respect 
to  the  observance  of  Christmas  and  Easter,  and  even  of 
the  Lenten  season.  There  can  be  no  question  that  it  is 
due  to  Episcopal  rather  than  Roman  influence.  This 
is  especially  evident  in  the  case  of  Lent.  Though  its 
religious  observance  is  by  no  means  general,  yet  it 
receives  almost  universal  recognition  in  the  abandon- 
ment of  social  gaieties.  This  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact 
that  during  this  holy  season  a  large  and  important 
section  of  society  withdraws  from  the  social  world,  and 
it  is,  as  everybody  knows,  composed  not  of  Romanists, 
but  of  Episcopalians. 

Truly  we  may  thank  God  and  take  courage.  The 
day  of  small  things  and  of  adversity  is  being  succeeded 


SIO 


THE    AMERICAN    CHURCH. 


Hi 

■1  \ 
If 

p 

'1 

■:i|, 

■  ll 

'      1 

1  '1 

l  ''l 

J 

1     ! 

i    ! 

i 


by  one  of  rapid  growth  and  great  prosperity.  The 
touching  prayer  contained  in  the  old  poetical  version  of 
the  nineteenth  Psalm,  sung  at  the  Consecration  of 
Bishop  Seabury,  is  being  graciously  answered : 

"To  satisfy  and  cheer  our  souls, 
Thy  early  mercies  send ; 
That  we  may  all  our  days  to  come 
In  joy  and  comfort  spend. 

"Let  happy  times  with  large  amends 
Dry  up  our  former  tears, 
Or  equal  at  the  least,  the  term 
Of  our  afflicted  years. 

"To  all  thy  servants.  Lord,  let  this 
Thy  wondrous  work  be  known, 
And  to  our  offspring  yet  unborn, 
Thy  glorious  power  be  shown. 

"Let  Thy  bright  rays  upon  us  shine. 
Give  Thou  our  work  success, 
The  glorious  work  we  have  in  hand, 
Do  Thou  vouchsafe  to  bless." 


1 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


LECTURE  VI. 

OBdECTIONS  TO  THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 

I.  Prayer  Book  Worship. 

TI.  Formalism.    ' 

III.  Vestments. 

IV.  Lack  of  Vital  Religion. 

V.     Composed  of  the  Upper  Classes. 
VI.     Bigoted  and  Exclusive. 
VIL     Like  the  Roman  Catholic. 


(311) 


'!. 


»  ' 


' 


r. 


AUTHORITIES. 


Bull,  Bp.,  A  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Clarke,  Walk  About  Zion. 

CrAKANTHORP'S   DeFENSIO   EcCLESIiE    ANOLICANiE. 

CuRTEis,  Dissent  in  Its  Relation  to  the  Church  of  England. 
Garnier,  Canon,  Church  or  Dissent. 

Hopkins,  Bp.,  The  Primitive  Church  Compared  with  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church  of  the  Present  Day. 
Kip,  Bp.,  Double  Witness  of  the  Church. 

Snyder,  The  Chief  Things,  or  Church  Doctrine  for  the  People. 
Staley,  The  Catholic  Religion. 

PAMPHLETS. 
Shanklin,  Some  Objections  Against  the  Episcopal  Church. 

MISCELLANEOUS. 
Why  Can't  Our  Ministers  Preach  in  Your  Pulpits. 


(312' 


Objections  to  the  Episcopal 

Church. 

IN  almost  every  community  in  which  the  Episcopal 
Church  is  represented,  many  persons  are  kept  from 
an  examination  of  her  peculiar  claims  to  the  alle- 
giance of  Americans  by  certain  groundless  objections, 
some  of  which  it  is  the  purpose  of  this  lecture  to  state 
and  answer.  No  attempt  will  here  be  made  to  exhaust 
the  subject,  because  the  most  weighty  of  the  objections 
have  been  considered  in  other  connections,  and  because 
many  of  those  which  remain  are  too  trifling  for  serious 
notice. 

It  is  believed  that  all  the  popular  objections  against 
the  Church  may  be  answered  not  only  to  the  entire  sat- 
isfaction of  candid  persons,  but  that  to  such,  some  of 
them  can  be  made  to  appear  as  re^^sons  why  Americans 
should  identify  themselves  with  the  Episcopal  Church 
rather  than  with  any  other. 


I. 

PRAYER  BOOK  WORSHIP. 

THOSE  who  object  to  the  Episcopal  Church  because 
she  uses  a  Prayer  Book  in  her  public  Services  are 
constantly  growing  fewer.  Indeed,  there  has 
been  for  some  time  a  marked  drift  towards  liturgical 
forms  of  worship  in  all  of  the  leading  Denominations. 
Many  of  their  ablest  representatives  have  been  advocat- 
ing, in  their  religious  journai-ls,  and  on  the  floor  of  their 

(313) 


II 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

Conferences  and  Synods  the  adoption  of  precomposed 
Services,  and  nearly  all  of  the  city  congregations  have 
anticipated  official  sanction  by  introducing  certain  fea- 
tures of  our  Ritual,  such  as  the  chanting  of  Scripture, 
the  responsive  reading  of  the  Psalms,  the  repetition  of 
the  Lord's  Prayer,  and  even  the  Apostles'  Creed  by  min- 
ister and  people.  Nevertheless,  there  are  still  some  to 
be  found  in  almost  every  community  who  feel  that  there 
can  be  no  **  praying  from  the  heart,"  no  genuine,  accept- 
able *' approach  to  the  throne  of  grace,"  except  by  an 
extempore  worship.  Of  such  let  me  beg  due  considera- 
tion of  the  following  facts : 

First  Fact.  Our  Lord  com munded  the  useof  precom- 
posed forms  of  prayer.  '*  When  ye  pray  say,  Our  Father." 
He  surely  would  not  have  given  this  direction  if  precom- 
posed prayers  tend  to  promote  empty,  formal  worship 
more  than  extempore  prayers. 

Second  Fact.  In  all  ages  of  the  Church,  in  both 
the  Old  and  the  New  Dispensation,  the  vast  majority 
of  the  Saints  worshipped  God  by  the  use  of  precom- 
posed Services  and  prayers.  Hebrew  scholars  tell  us 
that  the  Jews  had  not  only  fixed  forms,  but  also  a  fixed 
order  in  their  public  worship,  both  in  the  Temple  and  in 
their  synagogues.  And  when  the  Apostles  founded  the 
Church,  we  are  told,  at  the  very  outset,  that  it  was  one 
of  the  four  marks  of  the  Christian  Unity  that  all  joined, 
not  only  in  prayers,  but  in  "the  prayers,"  that  is,  cer- 
tain well-known,  appointed  prayers.  After  the  time  of 
the  Apostles  until  the  Reformation,  worship  by  precom- 
posed forms  was  the  universal  and  unvarying  custom. 
Justin  Martyr,  in  the  second  century,  speaks  expressly 
of  *' Common  Prayers."  A  hundred  years  later  Origen 
and  Cyprian  speak  respectively  of  the  *' appointed 
prayers,"  and  the  "customary  prayers."  These  "com- 
mon," "appointed,"  "customary"  prayers,  of  course, 


I 


PRAYER    BOOK   WORSHIP. 


315 


( 


could  not  have  been  extempore  prayers.  And  that  they 
were  not  such,  is  put  beyond  all  dispute  by  the  exist- 
ence of  Liturgies,  or  as  we  should  call  them,  Prayer 
Books,  which  have  been  used  in  various  parts  of  Chris- 
tendom from  the  earliest  times.  Such  are  the  Service 
Book  of  St.  James,  the  first  Bishop  of  Jerusalem,  used 
in  all  the  eastern  Churches ;  that  of  St.  Peter,  used  in 
Rome;  that  of  St.  Mark,  used  in  Africa:  that  of  St. 
Chrysostom,  used  in  Constantinople;  and  that  of  St. 
John,  used  in  Gaul,  Spain  and  Britain. 

Third  Fact.  Not  only  was  public  worship,  from  the 
Apostles' time  to  the  Reformation,  universally  conducted 
according  to  precomposed  forms,  but  even  at  this  day, 
out  of  three  hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  nominal  Chris- 
tians, at  least  three  hundred  millions  use  the  ancient 
and  divinely  sanctioned  method  of  worshiping  God  by 
means  of  written  forms  of  prayer  and  services. 

Fourth  Fact.  Public  prayer,  according  to  the 
teaching  of  Christ,  is  agreement  in  asking.  But  this 
cannot  take  place  unless  those  engaged  in  worship 
know  beforehand  what  they  are  to  ask.  This  essential 
knowledge  can  exist  only  when  the  people,  as  well  as  the 
minister,  are  aware  of  what  is  coming.  Hence,  a  lit- 
urgy is  indispensable  to  true  congregational  devo- 
tion. 

Fifth  Fact.  Strictly  speaking,  there  can  be  no  such 
thing  as  public  worship  without  the  use  of  precomposed 
forms.  Mr.  Spurgeon  is  credited  with  the  silly  remark 
that  he  would  tolerate  but  one  form  of  prayer,  namely, 
"  From  all  ready  made  prayers,  *  Good  Lord  deliver  us.' " 
But  he  was  forthwith  answered  by  an  English  Dissenter, 
who  pointed  out  that  in  his  Sunday  School  Hymn 
Book  the  great  Baptist  preacher  of  London  had  uncon- 
sciously sanctioned  and  adopted  a  large  number  of 
"ready-made  prayers."    All  Denomination alists,  so  far 


316 


OBJECTIONS   TO    TUE    EPISCOPAL   CUUKCU. 


1 


M 


as  I  know,  except  the  Quakers,  use  hymns  which  are,  in 
reaUty,  forms  af  worship. 

"  Critic  freely  may  rehearse 
Forms  of  prayer  and  praise  in  verse; 
Why  should  Critic  then  suppose 
Mine  are  sinful  when  in  prose? 
Must  my  prayer  be  thought  a  crime 
Merely  for  the  want  of  rhyme?" 

Again,  the  extempore  prayer  which  the  ministers  of 
non-lituro^cal  bodies  of  Christians  oifer  is,  so  far  as  the 
congregation  is  concerned,  a  precom posed  prayer,  just 
as  really  as  are  the  prayers  to  which  a  congregation  of 
Episcopalians  respond,  Amen.  I  repeat,  public  worship 
cannot  be  conducted  except  by  the  use  of  precomposed 
prayers  and  services.  So  far  as  the  congregations  are 
concerned,  the  only  difference  between,  for  example, 
Methodists  and  Episcopalians  is  that  the  members  of 
a  Methodist  congregation  prefer  a  form  of  prayer  set 
forth  by  their  minister,  while  the  members  of  a  congre- 
gation of  Episcopalians  prefer  one  which  has  been 
selected  from  the  richest  treasuries  of  devotion,  and 
which  has  been  approved  by  the  whole  Church  in  Coun- 
cil assembled. 

Sixth  Fact.  The  use  of  the  Prayer  Book  in  public 
worship  tends  to  prevent  irreverence.  There  can  be  no 
question  that  the  ministers  of  non-liturgical  Churches 
are  constantly  in  great  danger  of  approaching  the 
Eternal  Being  in  too  easy,  unceremonious  and  irreverent 
a  manner.  No  doubt  all  of  us  have  witnessed  shocking 
examples  of  liberty  and  familiarity  in  approaches  and 
addresses  to  the  throne  of  grace.  Perhaps  we  have 
seen  a  minister  get  up  before  a  public  gathering  with  a 
cane  in  one  hand  and  his  hat  in  the  other,  and  folding 
his  arms  address  the  King  of  Kings  and  Lord  of  Lords 


PRAYER    BOOK    WORSHIP. 


317 


BB  if  he  were  complimenting  a  boy  in  the  street  for  his 
good  behavior.  What  an  abomination  in  the  estima- 
tion of  those  who  have  in  mind  the  majesty  of  God 
whose  throne  is  in  the  heaven  of  heavens,  is  the  prayer 
of  which  Mr.  Gough  used  to  tell:  '*We  pray  Thee  O 
God,  that  the  height  of  the  rostrum  may  not  interfere 
with  the  comfort  of  the  lecturer,  but  that  he  may  be 
able  to  give  us  as  good  a  lecture  as  Thou  hast  seen  in 
the  papers  he  has  given  in  other  towns  in  the  country." 

As  a  distinguished  Denominational  minister  con- 
fesses: "In  nearly  every  newspaper  you  may  read  some 
funny  story  based  upon  the  ignorance  or  eccentricity  or 
blasphemous  familiarity  of  some  extemporizing  prayer 
maker.  All  of  you  have  been  at  times  shocked  or  bored 
by  public  devotional  performances.  Nothing  of  this 
sort  ever  occurs  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  All  things 
are  done  and  spoken  decently  and  in  order." 

In  view  of  these  facts  there  can  be  no  reasonable  ob- 
jection urged  against  the  Episcopal  Church  on  account 
of  her  use  of  the  Prayer  Book,  unless  it  can  be  shown  that 
it  is  wanting  in  spirituality  or  erroneous  in  doctrine. 
It  can  hardly  be  defective  in  either  of  these  respects. 
From  beginning  to  end  the  Prayer  Book  consists  of  but 
little  more  than  selections  from  the  Holy  Scriptures.  It 
contains  the  whole  Book  of  Psalms  and  a  large  portion 
of  the  Gospels  and  Epistles.  These  in  themselves  occupy 
four  hundred  and  twenty-seven  pages  of  the  five  hun- 
dred and  fifty-seven  paged  edition  which  I  happen  to 
have  before  me,  leaving  only  one  hundred  and  thirty 
pages  for  the  various  Services,  in  all  about  twenty-five 
in  number.  Some  of  these,  notably  the  Morning  and 
Evening  Prayer  and  the  Holy  Communion,  which  are 
most  frequently  used,  are  each  about  two-thirds  part 
a  compilation  from  the  Bible,  and  even  the  remaining 
third  is  composed  of  prayers,  exhortations  and  confes- 


mjECTIOXS   TO   THE   EPISCOPAL  CHURCH. 

sions  in  almost  the  very  words  of  Scripture.  And  the 
Prayer  Book  as  a  whole  is  an  inheritance  from  the 
earliest  and  purest  ages  of  the  Church.  It  has  come 
down  to  us  from  the  Apostles,  Saints  and  Martyrs. 
Surely  a  form  of  worship  compiled  from  the  Word  of 
God  by  such  as  these  cannot  be  lacking  in  either  spiritu- 
ality or  soundness  of  doctrine.  "Blame  us  not,  then, 
if  we  value  our  liturgy ;  it  embodies  the  anthems  of 
Saints ;  it  thrills  the  heart  with  the  dying  songs  of  the 
faithful ;  it  is  hallowed  with  the  blood  of  the  Martyrs ; 
it  glowis  with  aacred  fire." 


II. 

FORMALISM. 

UWDEK  this  head  we  shall  consider  the  objections 
urged  against  the  postures  used  in  our  wor- 
ship. 
Many  people  find  in  the  formalities  of  her  worship 
an  insuperable  objection  to  the  Episcopal  Church. 
"What  is  the  use,"  they  ask,  "of  changing  postures  so 
frequently?  You  kneel  and  stand,  say,  a  dozen  times  in 
the  course  of  Morning  or  Evening  Prayer.  Why  not 
follow  the  example  of  other  Protestants  and  remain 
quietly  seated  during  the  most,  if  not  the  whole,  of  the 
Service?  "  The  answer  is  found  in  the  fact  that  while  the 
Services  of  the  various  non-liturgical  bodies  of  Chris- 
tians, if  we  except  the  hymns,  provide  only  for  a  mental 
worship,  those  of  this  Church  make  the  fullest  provision 
for  the  adoration  of  Almighty  God  not  only  with  the 
mind,  but  also  with  the  voice  and  body.  It  is  a  curious 
thing  that  those  who  have  the  most  to  say  about  the 
Priesthood's  coming  between  a  man  and  his  God,  are 


FORMALISM. 


319 


the  very  ones  that  intrust  their  worship  most  exclu- 
sively to  ministers.  Episcopalians  leave  less  of  this  all- 
important  duty  to  the  Priest  than  any  other  body  of 
Christians  with  which  I  am  acquainted.  Our  Laity  re- 
serve to  them  selves  the  right  of  taking  about  half  of  the 
Service.  In  rendering  their  part  it  is  necessary  that 
they  should  assume  different  postures  in  order  to  suit 
the  action  to  the  words.  All  must  perceive,  the  moment 
that  they  begin  to  reflect,  that  it  would  be  highly  im- 
proper for  us  to  confess  our  sins  and  pray  for  pardon 
while  sitting.  The  instinct  of  propriety  and  reverence 
teaches  us  that  we  should  not  sit  when  we  come  before 
"the  King  of  kings  and  Lord  of  lords  in  his  Holy 
Temple.''  We  must  at  least  kneel  in  prayer  and  stand  in 
praise.  Except  for  the  precept  which  inculcates  mercy 
rather  than  sacrifice,  the  Church  would  doubtless  forbid 
the  use  of  pews  or  chairs  altogether,  unless  during  the 
sermon,  but  out  of  consideration  for  physical  infirmities 
and  because  weariness  would  tend  to  distract  the  mind, 
we  are  allowed  to  sit  during  the  reading  of  the  Lessons 
from  God's  Word,  except  in  the  case  of  the  Gospel  for 
the  day  which  is  heard  standing,  because  it  is  regarded 
as  a  special  message  from  the  Lord  Himself. 

But  "the  getting  up  and  down"  to  which  our  De- 
nominational brethren  object,  is  justifiable  upon  the 
ground  of  helpfulness  in  worship  as  well  as  reverence. 
There  is  an  intimate  connection  between  mental  and 
bodily  worship ;  indeed  it  is  questionable  whether  the 
former  can  long  exist  without  the  latter.  At  all  events 
there  are  many  among  the  more  thoughtful  and  candid 
of  the  non-liturgical  Denominations,  who  feel  that  wor- 
ship is  rapidly  becoming  "a  lost  art"  among  them. 
That  there  is  only  too  much  foundation  for  this  opinion, 
is  evident  from  the  prevailing  motive  for  assembling 
themselves  together.     In  nine  cases  out  of  ten  it  is 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

avowe<i1y  tor  fie  purpose  of  hearing;  the  sermon  and 
music,  that  is,  of  being  edified  and  entertained,  not  in 

order  to  worship. 

Ajrain,  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  Scriptures 
lend  their  support  to  the  Episcopalian  rather  than  to  the 
Denominational  manner  of  worshipping  God.    We  read 
of  standing,  bowing,  kneeling  and  prostration  in  wor- 
ship.   Not  only  were  these  the  postures  assumed  by  our 
Lord  and  the  Saints  of  the  Bible,  but  also  by  the  primi- 
tive Christians  and,  in  fact,  by  the  Church  of  all  ages 
down  to  the  Reformation .    Before  that  time  the  custom 
which  now  prevails  among  Denominationalists  of  sit- 
ting during  the  progress  of  Divine  Service,  was  utterly 
unknown.    As  the  learned  author  of  "The  Antiquities 
of  the  Christian  Church"  points  out,  "  Tertullian  indeed 
says,  there  were  some  superstitious  persons  in  his  time, 
admirers  of  the  book  called  '  Hermes  Pastor,'  who  made 
it  a  matter  of  conscience  to  sit  down  some  time  when 
prayer  was  ended,  because  they  found  the  example  of 
the  pastor  in  that  book  to  that  purpose.    For  as  he  sat 
down  upon  a  bed  after  prayer,  so  they  thought  them- 
selves  obliged  to  do  the  same  in  compliance  with  his 
example.    But  this  is  no  proof  of  their  sitting  at  prayer, 
but  only  after  prayer  was  ended ;  and  that,  too,  grounded 
upon  a  very  weak  and  superstitious  opinion,  that  every 
circumstance  of  an  action  or  narration,  however  indif- 
ferent in  itself,  was  to  be  drawn  into  example  and  to  he 
made  matter  of  necessary  duty,  according  to  which  way 
of  reasoning,  as  Tertullian  observes,  they  must  have 
worshipped  nowhere  but  where  there  was  a  bed,  nor  sat 
upon  a  chair  or  bench  because  it  would  have  been  a  de- 
viation from  their  example.    He  adds  that  the  heathen 
only  were  used  to  sit  after  prayer  before  their  idols,  and 
for  that  very  reason  it  was  not  fit  for  Christians  to  imi- 
tate their  practice.    All  which  shows  that  the  Christians 


VESTMENTS. 


321 


then  were  so  far  from  using  sitting  as  a  posture  of  devo 
tion,  that  they  did  not  think  it  proper  to  sit  even  aftei 
prayer  in  the  presence  of  God,  whilst  the  Angel  of  Prayer 
stood  by  them,  and  because  it  looked  more  like  a  heath- 
enish than  a  Christian  practice." 

It  appears  then  tha  t  the  formalities  to  which  Denom- 
inationalists object  in  the  worship  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  are  justified  by  reason,  Scripture  and  history, 
and  consequently  that  their  own  practice  is  condemned 
by  this  tribunal  from  which  there  is  no  appeal. 

ni. 

VESTMENTS. 

THE  prejudice  of  many  against  the  Episcopal 
Church  chiefly  grows  out  of  the  vestments  worn 
by  her  Clergy  while  conducting  Divine  Service. 
A  representative  of  this  class  said  to  the  writer:  "There 
is  one  thing  about  your  Church  which  I  fear  I  can  never 
become  reconciled  to,  and  that  is  the  wearing  of  gowns." 
An  eflbrt  Will  now  be  made  to  answer  this  objection  to 
the  Church. 

It  will  be  remembered  that  God  gave  minute  direc- 
tions concerning  the  attire  of  the  Jewish  Ministry  which 
bears  much  the  same  relation  to  the  Christian  that  the 
bud  does  to  the  flower.  In  Exodus  28:  2,  we  read: 
*'And  thou  shalt  make  holy  garments  for  Aaron  thy 
brother,  for  glory  and  for  beauty."  Dr.  Adam  Clarke, 
the  great  Methodist  commentator,  speaking  on  this 
text  says:  "The  white  surplice  in  the  Service  of  the 
Church  is  almost  the  only  thing  that  remains  of  those 
ancient  and  becoming  vestments,  which  God  commanded 
to  be  made  'for  glory  and  beauty.'  Clothing,  as  em- 
blematical of  office,  is  of  more  consequence  than  is  gen- 
erally imagined."     Chalmers,  a   Presbvterian   divine, 

C.  A.-21 


B 


322 


OBJECTIONS   TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


VESTMENTS. 


323 


I 


commenting  on  the  same  passage,  says:  "There  is 
here  a  distinct  sanction  given  to  the  association  of 
outward  splendor  with  the  office  of  the  ministry— if  not 
such  as  to  make  it  imperative  or  indispensable,  at  least 
as  to  condemn  the  intolerance  of  those  who  stand  op- 
posed to  it.  In  the  antipathy  to  priestly  garments, 
and  in  the  controversies  which  have  been  raised  about 
them,  I  can  take  no  share." 

The  use  of  ministerial  vestments   and  insignia  of 
'Office  is  also  justified  by  a  deep-rooted  instinct  which 
in  all  ages,  our  own  not  excepted,  has  found  universal 
expression.    It  is  this  instinct  which  accounts  for  the 
gowns  worn  by  the  'Judges  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the 
United  States,  the  uniforms  of  our  army  and  navy,  and 
the  epaulets  of  their  officers.    Even  the  members  and 
officials  of  secret  orders  are  distinguished  by  regalia, 
scarfs  and   badges.    This  being  the  case,  the  use  of 
sanctuary  vestments  cannot  reasonably  and  consistently 
be  objected  to.    As  has  been  well  said:    "When  objec- 
tion is  made  to  our  Church  on  this  gi'ound,  may  we  not 
fairly  reply  that,  to  be  consistent,  the  objector  must 
insist  upon  the  officer's  laying  aside  his  uniform ;  that  he 
must  oppose  the  badges  and  regaha  of  the  different  orders 
and  societies,  and  that  when  he  has  abolished  all  these, 
we  shall  be  prepared  to  allow  his  objection  some  weight, 
but  not  until  then?"    If  this  book  should  chance  to 
fall  into  the  hands  of  some  good  Methodist  objectors 
to   our  vestments  and  Services,  the  knowledge  that 
through  all  his  life  John  Wesley  regularly  used  both, 
may  go  far  towards  reconciling  such  to  them.    Except 
in  his  field  preaching,  which  was  never  allowed  to  con- 
flict with  the  Church's  Services,  he  always  wore  essen- 
tially the  same  Priestly  garments  and  read  the  same 
prayers  that  are  now  seen  and  heard  in  the  Episcopal 
Church  Service. 


The  sanctuary  vestments  convey  symbolic  instruction. 
Not  to  go  into  particulars,  the  white  surplice  reminds 
both  minister  and  people  that  they  should  be  clothed 
in  righteousness,  and  the  stole,  that  they  must  bear  the 
yoke  of  Christ.  But  aside  from  their  teaching  value, 
our  vestments  serve  a  very  practical  purpose.  So  far 
as  appearance  in  the  Chancel-  is  concerned,  they  place 
those  whose  circumstances  oblige  them  to  wear  "home 
spun  "  on  the  same  footing  with  their  brethren  who  are 
able  to  go  about  in  ''soft  clothing." 

In  view  of  the  Scriptural n ess  of  Ecclesiastical  vest- 
ments, of  their  varied  usefulness  and  of  the  fact  that 
some  peculiarity  of  dress  is  almost  universally  adopted 
as  the  insignia  of  office,  it  seems  surpassingly  strange 
that  the  first  English  Separatists  went  out,  because  the 
Church  did  not  discard  the  Bishop's  robe  and  the 
Priest's  surplice  and  stole  which  they  were  pleased  to 
characterize  as  ''the  rags  of  Popery."  But  this  objec- 
tion, though  persistently  urged  for  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years,  at  last  bids  fair  to  give  w  ay  before  the  gen- 
eral reaction  towards  the  Church  and  her  ways.  I,  my- 
self, have  seen  Presbyterian  ministers  in  this  country 
attired  in  black  silk  gowns — white  would  have  been 
more  appropriate — conducting  a  liturgical  Service.  In 
Scotland  where  the  cassock,  gown  and  bands  are  more 
common  I  heard  a  "Parson"  read  our  evening  prayer 
with  but  few  omissions,  and  this  in  old  St.  Giles,  Edin- 
burgh, where  the  apocryphal  "Jenny  Geddes"  in  the 
yefxr  1637,  cast  a  stool  at  the  surpliced  minister  who 
ventured  to  reestablish  the  Church  of  England  worship. 

It  may  be  observed  in  passing  that  the  clerical  suits 
which  most  of  our  clergymen  wear,  are  also  justifiable 
on  several  accounts.  The  ability  readily  to  distinguish 
ministers  from  laymen  is  highly  advantageous — it  tends 
to   make   the   Clergy  so   many  witnesses   for   Christ, 


324 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE   EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


LACK    OF    VITAL   RELIGION. 


325 


V 


known  to  all  men ;  it  sometimes  renders  them  useful  to 
strangers  who  but  for  the  distinctive  habit,  would  not 
be  aware  of  their  high-calling;  it  often  checks  improper 
conversation,  profanity,  rudeness  and  violence. 


IV. 

LACK  OF  VITAL  RELIGION, 

OF  course  others  must  be  our  judges  in  this  deli- 
cate matter,  and,  if  this  be  their  just  verdict,  it 
is  becoming  that  we  should  submit  without  pro- 
test, and  humbly  begin  a  reformation.    And,  yet,  I 
trust  that  I  am  not  going  beyond  the  bounds  of  pro- 
priety in  calling  attention  to  the  fact  that  there  is  a 
difference  of  opinion  as  to  whether  the  possession  of 
"vital  religion"  is  demonstrated  by  pious  profession, 
or  by  good  works.    If,  as  St.  James  seems  to  teach,  it 
consists  in  the  latter  rather  than  in  the  former,  the 
Episcopal   Church  will   compare  favorably  with   any 
other  body  of  Christians   of  equal  size.    Indeed,  the 
assertion  may  be  safely  ventured  that  in  places  where 
we  are  as  well  represented  as  others,  none  give  or  do 
as  much  for  the  cause   of  beneficence.     Our   contri- 
butions to  hospitals  and  other  institutions  of  mercy 
fa  New  York  and   Philadelphia,  and  in  most  of  the 
principal  cities,  are  much  greater  than  those  of  any 
other  Christian  body.    I  happen  to  have  at  hand  a  clip- 
/ping  from  "The  Churchman"  of  December  24,  1887, 
which  forcibly  illustrates  the  truth  of  this  assertion : 
"In  New  York  the  Hospital  Sunday  collection  is  taken 
in  the  Churches  on  the  last  Sunday  of  the  year,  and  in 
the  Synagogues  on  the  preceding  Saturday.    In  1886 
the  various  Denominations  were  represented  as  follows: 
Episcopal,  $16,578.12;  Presbyterian,  f  6,458.27;  Con- 


gregational, |3, 520.08;  Synagogues,  11,602.06;  Meth- 
odist, 11,402.00;  Reformed,  |1,262.92;  Lutheran, 
1770.57;  Baptist,  |368.53;  Unitarian,  1227.00;  Uni- 
versalist,  $122.70;  Roman  Catholic,  $108.13;  Sweden- 
borgian,  $92.50;  Ethical  Culture,  $92.00;  Friends, 
$60.00;  other  Churches,  $119.42.  Total,  $32,784.30." 
Observe  that  the  Episcopal  Church  gave  towards  the 
support  of  hospitals  on  Hospital  Sunday,  1886,  $185.- 
97  more  than  half  of  the  whole  collection.  And  there 
can  be  but  little  doubt  that  this  showing  is  substan- 
tially true  of  every  year.  Moreover  with  the  possible 
exception  of  the  Romanists,  Episcopalians  in  all  our 
great  cities  outnumber  the  active  workers  of  other 
bodies  in  the  various  fields  of  charity.  We  bespeak  for 
these  facts  a  candid  consideration  on  the  part  of  those 
who  think  they  are  justified  in  alleging  that  the  Epis- 
copal Church  is  behind  other  Christian  bodies  touch- 
ing "fervent  piety"  or  "vital  religion." 

Much  of  the  talk  about  the  Episcopal  Church's  lack  in 
this  respect,  is  due  to  the  erroneous  impression  that  true 
religion  consists  in  not  doing  certain  things,  such  as 
dancing,  card  playing  and  attending  theatres,  and  that 
people  who  do  these  things  cannot  be  sincere  Christians. 
But  may  not  those  who  do  them,  ask  their  critics,  "Who 
art  thou  that  judgeth  another  man's  servant  ?  To  his 
own  master  [conscience]  he  standeth  or  falleth."  In  the 
face  of  the  fact  that  Solomon  said  there  is  "a  time  to 
laugh  "  and  "  a  time  to  dance,"  and  that  our  Saviour 
attended  the  wedding  atlCana,  where,  if  this  was  like 
other  Jewish  marriage  feasts,  and  there  is  every  reason 
for  believing  that  it  was,  there  were  feasting,  wine-drink- 
ing, merry-making  and  dancing,  what  Scriptural  ground 
have  our  accusers  for  alleging  that  a  Church  which 
does  not  forbid  these  things  "is  lacking  in  vital  reli- 
gion?" 


I 


!  fl: 


!:jt 


I 


I 


I 

f 


326 


OBJECTIONS  TO   THE   EPISCOPAL   CHUECH. 


COMPOSED    OF   THE    UPPER   CLASSES. 


327 


•Ml 


Bis  represented  that  many  Join  the  Episcopal  Church 

/because  she  does  not  forbid  amusements ;  but  it  would 
be  nearer  the  truth  to  say  that  this  Church  is  the  first 
choice  of  some  because  she  makes  no  unreasonable  and 
unscriptural  requirements  of  her  members,  and  allows 
them  to  conduct  their  private  and  home  life  in  accord 
with  the  dictates  of  conscience  and  natural  preferences  of 
taste,  so  long  as  the  moral  and  social  law  of  God  is  not 
broken.  We  admit  that  we  have  too  much  worldliness 
among  us  and  would  not  say  one  word  in  its  justifica- 
tion. But  I  would  respectfully  remind  those  who  re- 
proach our  Church  because  of  this  fault  in  some  of  her 
members,  that  people  who  live  in  glass  houses  should 
not  recklessly  throw  stones.  The  votaries  of  society  are 
not  by  any  means  exclusively  Episcopalians.  In  fact 
so  evenly  are  the  various  Protestant  Denominations 
represented,  that  none  should  venture  to  take  the 
mote  out  of  the  eye  of  his  brother  religionist  without 
first  making  quite  sure  that  there  is  not  a  beam  in  his 
own  eye. 

A  Church  witch  stands  second  to  no  body  of  Chris- 
tians in  her  contributions  of  both  money  and  workers 
to  the  cause  of  benevolence;  which  has  preachers  of  right- 
eousness who  shrink  not  from  rebuking  sin,  even  "in 
high  places,"  which,  in  every  age  of  the  history  of  the 
English-speaking  race,  has  produced  such  Saints  as  Al- 
ban,  the  Venerable  Bede,  Dunstan,  Becket,  Grosseteste, 
Wycklifie,  Ridley,  Cranmer,  Latimer,  Taylor,  Ken,  Wes- 
ley, Wilberforce,  Bloomfield,  Sickersteth,  Keble,  Selwyn, 
Patteson,  Muhlenberg,  Hannington,  and  ten  thousand 
times  ten  thousand  besides,  who,  though  less  distin- 
guished, have  their  names  no  less  surely  recorded  in  the 
Lamb's  Book  of  Life— a  Church,  I  say,  which  has  pro- 
duced, and  is  producing,  such  philanthropists,  such 
preachers,  such  Saints,  should  not  be  reproached  with  a 


want  of  '*  vital  religion."  If  "fervent  piety"  does  not 
exist  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  will  her  critics  kindly  tell 
us  what  it  is,  and  where  it  may  be  found  ? 


I 


V. 


COMPOSED  OF  THE  UPPER  CLASSES. 

T  is  objected  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is  composed 
of  the  upper  classes  to  the  exclusion  of  the  Classes. 
Granting  for  the  time  being  that  this  objection  is 
well  founded,  I  wish  to  show  that  it  should  not,  as  it 
certainly  will  not,  permanently  prejudice  thoughtful 
people  against  this  Church,  but  rather  attract  them  to 
her.  For  such  will  readily  perceive  that  the  dominant 
peopleof  a  community  must  have  a  Church  home  as  well 
as  their  poorer  and  perhaps  less  cultured  neighbors,  and 
that,  if  it  be  true  that  the  Episcopal  Church  furnishes  a 
home  for  them,  it  should  be  cordially  welcomed  and 
kindly  spoken  of  by  all. 

And  we  are  also  of  the  opinion  that,  if  this  popular 
estimation  of  the  Episcopal  Church  be  really  true,  the 
day  is  not  far  distant  when  people  will  begin  to  inquire, 
Why  is  it  so  ?  And,  if  I  mistake  not,  the  answer  to  this 
question  will  contribute  to  account  for,  and  to  increase, 
the  Church's  rapid  growth,  which,  of  late,  has  been  a 
source  of  so  great  encouragement  to  her  members  and 
friends.  For  the  answer  must  be  that  this  Church  is 
the  home  of  the  dominant  people  of  the  country,  either 
because  she  possesses  decidedly  superior  qualities  which 
recommend  her  to  the  broader  and  more  intelligent 
elements  of  American  society,  or  else  that  by  her  more 
complete  system  of  religious  culture  she  tends  to  make 
her  adherents  dominant.  Either  of  these  answers  to 
the  inquiry,  Why  is  the  Episcopal  Church  the  home  in 


328 


OBJECTIONS   TO   TUE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


COMPOSED    OF   THE    UPPER   CLASSES. 


329 


k 


11 


SO  many  instances  of  the  leaders  in  the  social,  political 
and  commercial  world,  will,  as  time  goes  on,  and  mis- 
understanding is  corrected,  do  more  to  commend  than 
to  condemn  her  to  the  thoughtful. 

But  we  will  not  admit  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is 
composed  almost  exclusively,  or  even  principally,  of  the 
wealthy  and  cultivated.    In  her,  as  in  all  bodies  of 
Christians,  the  great  middle  class  fortunately  predomi- 
nates;   they   are  the  back-bone  and   sinew  of  *^the 
Churches''  as  well  as  of  the  country;  moreover,  it  is 
from  them  that  the  more  highly  favored  few  arise.    We 
have  very  little  aristocracy  by  inheritance  in  the  United 
States.    It  is  doubtless  true  that  proportionately  more 
of  the  sons  and  daughters  of  the  Episcopal  Church  than 
of  any  other  Christian  body  rise  to  the  first  rank  in  the 
commercial,  professional,  official,  and  social  life  of  the 
country.    One  of  our  most  learned  and  judicious  clergy- 
men, who,  because  of  his  fairness  towards  the  Denomi- 
nations, was  held  in  the  highest  estimation  by  them, 
and  was  for  many  years  the  President  of  their  local 
ministerial  association,  told  me  in  his  old  age  that 
the  observation  of  a  long  life  convinced  him  that  the 
ability  of  the  Episcopal  Church  to  make  the  most  of  her 
children  amounts  to  a  species  of  genius  which  is  not 
paralleled  in  any  other  communion.    Speaking  of  the 
parishes  of  outlying  smaller  cities  and  towns,  with  the 
working  of  which  he  had  an  intimate  acquaintance,  he 
.  said  that  he  had  always  observed  that  when  a  young 
couple  connect  themselves  with  the  Episcopal  Church, 
they,  in  a  remarkable  number  of  cases,  begin  to  grow 
in  every  form  of  prosperity,  and  continue  until  they 
outgrow  the  place ;  then  they  move  to  some  large  city 
where  ultimately  they  take  first  rank.  He  had  met  with 
so  many  instances  of  this  kind  under   such  varying 
conditions,  and  had  seen  comparatively  so  little  of  it 


outside,  that  he  was  persuaded  that  the  elevating  influ- 
ence of  the  Church  was  one  of  her  distinguishing  char- 
acteristics. After  having  my  attention  called  to  this 
interesting  matter,  I  found  that  my  own,  up  to  that 
time,  comparatively  limited  observation  tended  to  cor- 
roborate the  representation  of  my  aged  friend.  A 
more  or  less  systematic  inquiry  subsequently  instituted, 
convinces  me  that  he  was  right  so  far,  at  least,  as  the 
Diocese  of  Ohio  is  concerned.  As  an  illustration  in  point, 
I  could  name  a  town  of  less  than  10,000  inhabitants 
from  which  fifteen  of  the  young  people,  a  few  days  be- 
fore the  writing  of  this  passage,  started  off  to  various 
widely-separated  seminaries  and  colleges  of  higher  edu- 
cation. All,  with  possibly  one  exception,  came  from 
the  so-called  middle  class  parentage.  The  majority  of 
them  are  sure  to  better  their  condition  in  life.  Is  it  not 
remarkable  that  twelve  of  the  fifteen  should  be  com- 
municants of  the  Episcopal  Church,  which  is  the  small- 
est Christian  body  of  the  town,  being  still  a  mission 
station?  Some  years  ago  a  layman,  in  showing  me  the 
village  in  which  he  lived,  pointed  out  our  little  board 
chapel,  and,  by  way  of  apology  for  its  insignificant  ap- 
pearance as  compared  with  other  places  of  worship, 
told  me  that  almost  every  young 'man  who  had  risen 
above  mediocrity  and  made  for  himself  a  name,  had 
gone  out  from  that  Sunday  School  and  Church.  Two 
of  the  Clerical  deputies  of  the  General  Convention  of 
A.  D.  1895  were  from  that  little  town  and  congregation. 
And  as  for  the  very  poor  I  am  sorry  to  say  that  not 
many  of  them  are  found  in  any  of  '*the  churches,"  but 
I  am  glad  to  be  able  to  testify  that  so  far  as  my  obser- 
vation goes  they  are  just  as  welcome  in  the  most  fash- 
ionable congregations  of  Episcopalians  as  they  are  in 
the  corresponding  congregations  of  other  Christian 
Ibodies.    And  none  are  more  solicitous— I  do  not  except 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE   EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


t 


li 


/ 


Romanists— that    the    poor    shall    have  the   Gospel 
preached  to  them  without  money  and  without  price. 
In  our  large  cities  we  have  more  down-town  Churches 
—Churches  which  are  kept  for  the  poor  population— 
than  any  other  body  of  Protestant  Christians.    Before 
making  up  the  programme  for  the  last  Triennial  Council 
of  the  Congregational  body,  the  committee  requested 
distinguished  delegates  to  suggest  topics  for  considera- 
tion.    In  one  of  the  replies  this  subject  was  suggested : 
"Why  is  the  Episcopal  Church  above  all  others  success- 
ful in  attracting  to  her  Communion  both  the  high- 
est and  the  lowest  classes  of  society?"    And  that  the 
Episcopal  Church  has  a  better  title  than  any  Christian 
body  to  be  called  the  Church  of  the  English-speaking 
poor,  will  be  put  beyond  doubt  if  we  rise  to  a  world-wide 
view  of  the  subject.    The  Anglican  Communion,  includ- 
ing the  Church  of  England,  and  her  colonial  branches, 
and  the  Episcopal  Church  of  the  United  States,  has 
about  twenty-eight  millions  of  adherents.    It  is  a  low 
estimate  to  say  that  two-thirds,  or  fourteen  millions  of 
these  belong  to  the  poorer  classes.    Now  the  largest  of 
the  other  bodies,  not  excepting  the  Roman,  have  not 
fourt^n  millions  of  English-speaking  adherents,  includ- 
ing both  rich  and  poor;  and  as  none  of  them,  except 
possibly  the  Roman  Church,  has  a  greater  proportion 
of  the  poor  than  the  Anglican  Communion,  she  is  clearly 
entitled   to  the  credit  of   being  recognized  above  all 
others  as  the  Church  of  the  English-speaking  poor. 

•*0h,  the  poor  man's  friend  is  the  Church  of  Christ, 
From  birth  to  his  funeral  day ; 
She  makes  him  the  Lord's,  in  her  surpliced  arms, 
And  singeth  his  burial  lay." 


\ 


VI. 


BIGOTED  AND  EXCLUSIVE, 

IN  support  of  this  charge  Denominationalists  affirm 
that  we  do  not  allow  their  ministers  to  preach  in 
our  pulpits,  that  we  refuse  to  admit  their  members 
to  our  Communion,  and  that  we  do  not  recognize  their 
organizations  as  being  true  Churches.  Now,  though 
there  is  some  difference  of  opinion  and  practice  among 
us  touching  these  things,  yet,  upon  the  whole,  candor 
requires  that  we  should  plead  guilty  to  each  of  the 
accusations.  Therefore,  unless  we  can  satisfactorily  ex- 
plain our  conduct,  it  would  seem  that  the  charge  of 
bigotry  and  uncharitableness  is  sustained. 

What  then  have  we  to  say  in  justification  of  our 
refusal  to  allow  the  ministers  of  the  various  Denomina- 
tions to  conduct  our  Services?  It  should  of  course  be 
remarked  that  one  of  our  canons  or  laws,  makes  it 
impossible  for  us  to  join  in  the  practice  of  exchanging 
pulpits  that  is  common  among  some  of  the  Denomina- 
tions—I say  some,  for  the  custom  is  not  universal 
among  them.  The  Congregationalists,  Presbyterians, 
Methodists,  Baptists,  English  Lutherans,  United  Breth- 
ren, and  a  few^  others  are  accustomed  to  more  or  less 
frequent  interchanges,  and  to  joining  in  Union  Temper- 
ance, Thanksgiving  and  Revival  Services.  But  none  of 
the^e  would  exchange  with  a  Universalist  or  Unitarian, 
because  they  do  not  believe  these  Denominations  to  be 
orthodox. 

And  right  here  we  touch  upon  the  principal  of  the 
reasons  why  we  do   not   exchange  with  any  of   the 

(331) 


tiij 


\. 


f 


332 


OBJECTIONS    TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CUUKCH. 


Denominatious  about  us.  For  though  as  compared 
with  Unitarians  they  are  sound  in  doctrine,  yet  the 
various  non-Episcopal  Denominations  are,  in  our  esti- 
mation, unsound  touching  what  we  regard  as  funda- 
mentals. Not  to  mention  other  differences  between 
them  and  ourselves,  they  believe  that  any  man  can 
found  a  Church,  and,  oil  this  ground,  justify  their  sep- 
aration from  the  historic  Church  of  Christ  and  the 
Apostles,  while  we  maintain  that  schism  is  a  great  sin, 
and  that  the  attempt  to  defend  it  is  a  grievous  error. 
This  being  our  honest  con\iction,  we  certainly  should 
be  accorded  as  much  right  to  exclude  them  from  our 
pulpits  as  they  exercise  in  the  case  of  those  with  whom 
they  do  not  agree.  From  the  standing  point  of  the 
Universalists  and  Unitarians  they  are  as  bigoted  and 
uncharitable  as  we  are  from  theirs. 

Those  who  make  the  complaint  seek  to  justify  it  by 
arguments  based  upon  the  goodness  and  ability  of  their 
minist-ers.  We  do  not  question  their  possession  of  these 
qualities,  but  on  the  other  hand  are  ready  to  pay  the 
tribute  of  highest  respect  and  admiration  to  many  of 
the  Denominational  ministers  whom  we  know.  If  it 
were  a  question  of  personal  holiness  or  of  learning  and 
aptness  to  teach,  we  should  certainly  often  be  found 
humbly  sitting  at  the  feet  of  some  of  them.  But  these 
virtues  have  nothing  to  do  with  the  matter  in  dispute. 
If  they  had,  those  who  rank  themselves  among  the  so- 
called  ** Evangelical  Denominations"  would  be  obliged 
to  admit  to  their  pulpits  Unitarian  ministers,  many  of 
whom  are  distinguished  for  their  piety  and  erudition. 
It  is  a  question  of  right  and  wrong— of  whether  or  not 
we  are  at  liberty  to  change  the  Divine  order  by  encour- 
aging division  in  the  Body  of  Christ  through  the  aban- 
donment of  the  divinelyinstituted  ministry  of  three 
orders,  Bishops,  Priests  and  Deacons.    Thus  the  argu- 


SIGOTED    AND    EXCLUSIVE. 


333 


ment  from  the  moral  and  intellectual  fitness  of  the 
Denominational  ministers  is  not  pertinent.  It  is 
exactly  the  ground  which  Korah  and  his  company  took 
against  Moses  and  Aaron,  when  they  wanted  to  justify 
their  intended  usurpation  of  the  Priesthood .  They  com- 
plained bitterly  that  Moses  and  Aaron  kept  the  sacred 
offices  to  themselves,  whereas  all  the  congregation  was 
holy.  "  No  Episcopalian  has  ever  been  more  berated  for 
his  exclusiveness—more  reproached  with  thinking  too 
much  of  himself  and  despising  his  brethren  than  were 
Moses  and  Aaron.  *And  they  gathered  themselves  to- 
gether against  them  and  said  unto  them,  Ye  take  too 
much  upon  you  seeing  all  the  congregation  are  holy, 
every  one  of  them,  and  the  Lord  is  am ong  them .  Where- 
fore then  lift  ye  up  yourselves  above  the  congregation 
of  the  Lord?'  Now  you  will  remember  that  this  man, 
Moses,  was  the  meekest  of  men.  He  did  not  deserve  the 
reproach  of  thinking  his  house  better  than  the  other 
families  of  Israel,  for  he  was  but  carrying  out  God's 
ordinance,  *that  no  stranger  which  was  not  of  the 
house  of  Levi  should  come  near  to  offer  incense.' " 

Is  it  not  possible  that  our  exclusiveness,  like  that  of 
Moses,  is  a  matter  of  principle,  and  not  an  evidence  of 
pride  a.nd  'bigotry?  Certainly  there  are  hundreds  of 
thousands  among  us  who  feel  that  we  must  stand  by 
the  One,  Holy,  Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  of  the 
English  race,  and  say:  **  There  is  no  Divine  warrant  for 
the  Denominational  theory;  no  trace  of  it  is  in  the  Bible 
or  the  early  Church.  It  is  not  the  system  instituted  by 
our  Lord  for  the  evangelization  of  the  world.  It  can 
remedy  no  evil,  for  it  is  in  itself,  by  the  strife  it  engenders, 
and  by  the  uncertainty  and  disputation  in  which  it  in- 
volves religious  truth  and  duty,  an  evil  incalculable." 
Because  we  feel  and  say  these  things  are  we  therefore 
justly  stigmatized  as  exclusive  bigots?    No,  we  should 


p 


I'.  <. 


I  I' 


It 


334 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE   EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


rather  be  honored  for  having  the  courage  of  our  convic- 
tion. 

But  even  if  there  were  no  principle  at  stake,  we  could 
not  as  a  rule  exchange  with  the  Denominational  Min- 
isters for  the  simple  reason  that  they  would  be  un- 
willing to  take  our  places  and  incapable  of  doing  so. 
This  practical  and  well-nigh  insuperable  difficulty  may 
be  aptly  illustrated  by  an  actual  occurrence  which  the 
saintly  Bishop  Bedell,  who  certainly  could  not  be  ac- 
cused of  uncharitableness  towards  the  Denominations, 
used  to  tell  to  the  great  amusenient  of  his  auditors. 
The  Bishop,  as  nearly  as  I  can  remember,  gave 
Ihe  story  as  follows:  I  placed  a  young  Deacon   in 

charge  of  the  parish  at .    He  soon  identified 

himself  with  the  local  ministerial  association,  and  this 
being  contrary  to  the  policy  of  his  predecessors,  he  be- 
came unusually  popular.  His  popularity,  however,  was 
not  destined  to  continue  long.  He  came  among  them 
in  October.  In  January  the  Association  determined  to 
inaugurate  a  Union  Revival  in  which  all  the  Protestant 
ministers  should  take  part.  The  Methodists,  Presby- 
terians, English  Lutherans,  Baptists  and  Episcopalians 
were  represented.  All  their  ministers  entered  into  the 
arrangement.  The  Services  were  to  be  held  on  each 
evening  of  the  week,  except  Saturday,  in  the  several 
churches  in  a  prearranged  order.  It  so  happened, 
either  by  design  or  accident,  that  the  turn  for  opening 
the  Episcopal  Church  to  the  Revival  came  last.  The 
Deacon,  therefore,  went  the  round  of  the  other  churches, 
and  all  were  pleased  by  his  presence  and  at  the  readi- 
ness and  ease  with  which  he  took  the  various  parts  of 
the  Service  that  were  assigned  to  him  from  time  to  time. 
Indeed  he  was  rapidly  gaining  for  himself  the  reputation 
of  being  unusually  broad-minded  and  brotherly  for  an 
Episcopal  Clergyman,  and  it  was  even  hinted  that  if 


BIGOTED    AND    EXCLUSIVE. 


335 


he  would  only  let  himself  down  a  little  in  speech  and 
bearing,  he  might  make  a  first-class  Revivalist.  But  his 
reputation  for  liberality  was  suddenly  blasted  and  their 
hope  of  his  becoming  an  Evangelist  withered  upon  the 
occasion  of  the  holding  of  the  Service  in  our  house  of 
worship.  This  resulted  from  a  most  unexpected  and 
embarrassing  hitch.  It  would  seem  that  the  Deacon 
was  either  truer  to  his  colors,  or  else  that  he  was  more 
of  a  wag  than  had  been  suspected.  For  it  was  dis- 
covered quite  too  late  that  he  had  taken  the  precaution 
of  providing  surplices  and  Prayer  Books  for  all.  As  the 
brethren  came  straggling  through  the  Church  towards 
the  Chancel,  where  they  expected  to  place  their  hats  and 
overcoats  upon  ^^tlie  Holy  Table,"  and  to  take  their 
seats  to  see  and  to  be  seen  until  "the  exercises"  should 
begin,  they  were  politely  conducted  into  the  vestry- 
room.  When  all  had  assembled,  the  Deacon,  to  their 
utter  surprise  began  to  hand  out  the  surplices.  Of 
course  there  was  a  chorus  of  protests.  The  Deacon, 
however,  calmly,  and  with  dignity,  reminded  them  that 
all,  including  himself,  had,  at  the  services  so  far  held, 
respected  the  customs  of  the  several  churches  visited, 
and  that  he  very  much  desired  that  there  should  be  no 
departure  from  this  reasonable  and  courteous  proced- 
ure. Of  course  no  satisfactory  answer  could  be  made 
to  this  argument,  and  so  there  was  nothing  for  the  par- 
sons to  do  but  to  submit.  Accordingly,  each,  with  what 
grace  he  could,  put  on  a  surplice  and  accepted  a  Prayer 
Book.  The  Deacon  having  apportioned  the  Service  be- 
tween them,  led  the  procession  into  the  Chancel  to  the 
great  astonishment  of  the  congregation,  which  was 
composed  of  Christians  of  every  name.  They  then  went 
on  with  the  Evening  Prayer,  taking  the  part  appointed 
to  them,  respectively;  but  they  had  not  proceeded  far 
when  they  became  hopelessly  mixed  and   exceedingly 


ni!: 


S3d 


OBJECTIOiJS  TO   TfiE   EPISCOPAL  CBUfiCH. 


embarrassed.  At  the  conclusion  of  each  portion  of  the 
Service  there  was  an  awkward  break  until  the  Deacon 
would  come  to  the  rescue  by  finding  the  place.  There 
was,  as  may  be  imagined,  an  utter  absence  of  dignity 
and  solemnity.  It  is  needless  to  observe  that  the  minis- 
ters of  the  town  in  which  the  unique  Service  took  place 
never  again  asked  the  Deacon,  or  any  of  his  successors, 
to  join  them  in  union  meetings. 

I  have  related  this  anecdote  at  some  length  because 
it  well  illustrates  the  practical  difiiculties  in  the  way  of 
our  exchanging  pulpits  with  Denominational  ministers. 
There  is  scarcely  one  in  a  hundred  of  them  that  can 
render  our  Services,  and  perhaps  fewer  still  who  would 
be  willing  to  wear  our  vestments,  and  conform  to  the 
customary  postures.  It  is  hoped  that  after  this  expla- 
nation, the  Denominational  reader  will  not  again  accuse 
us  of  bigotry  and  uncharitableness  because  we  do  not 
exchange  pulpits. 

As  to  the  Lord's  Supper  the  Anglican  Communion  is 
no  more  exclusive  to-day  than  she,  with  the  other  Apos- 
tolic Churches,  has  been  for  eighteen  hundred  years. 
Her  law  is  set  forth  in  the  Offices  for  Adult  Baptism 
and  Confirmation:  "It  is  expedient  that  every  per- 
son thus  baptized  should  be  confirmed  by  the  Bishop  so 
soon  after  his  Baptism  as  conveniently  may  be ;  that  so 
he  may  be  admitted  to  the  Holy  Communion;"  and 
**  There  shall  be  none  admitted  to  the  Holy  Communion 
until  such  time  as  he  be  confirmed,  or  be  ready  and 
desirous  to  be  confirmed. ''  These  Rubrics  were  designed 
to  maintain  the  Scriptural  position  of  Confirmation. 
Their  framers  had  no  thought  of  excluding  any  from 
the  Lord's  Supper.  The  object  was  rather  to  indicate 
the  way  of  coming.  Those  who  will  not  take  it  exclude 
themselves.  The  adherents  of  other  bodies  of  Christians 
do   not  often  present  themselves  at  our  Altars,  nor 


BIGOTED    AND    EXCLUSIVE. 


337 


is  there  as  much  inter-Communion  between  the  members 
of  the  various  non-Episcopal  Denominations  as  is  com- 
monly supposed.  However,  when  any  Baptized  but 
unconfirmed  persons  present  themselves,  it  may  be 
said  to  be  generally  true  that  our  Clergy  do  not  assume 
the  responsibility  of  denying  them.  Even  those  who 
interpret  the  rubrical  law  most  rigidly  seldom  turn 
such  away,  because  they  attribute  what  is  lacking  in 
them  for  the  want  of  Confirmation  to  the  failure,  owing 
to  defective  teaching,  to  apprehend  the  importance  of 
that  Apostolic  Ordinance,  and  hope  that  they  will 
receive  it  as  soon  as  they  can  be  taught  more  perfectly 
concerning  the  Divinely  appointed  way. 

But  it  is  claimed  that  there  is  abundant  evidence 
against  us  in  the  alleged  fact  that  we  do  not  regard  the 
various  Denominations  as  being  true  Churches.  As  Mr. 
Gladstone  has  pointed  out,  it  is  no  reply  to  the  Church- 
man's argument  to  cry  out  that  it  "unchurches"  Dis- 
senting communions.  He  reminds  them  that  when  the 
Puritans  "contended  against  the  Prelatical  constitution 
of  the  Church  of  England  by  arguing  that  the  entire  con- 
stitution of  the  Church  was  defined  in  the  Word  of  God, 
and  that  that  constitution  was  exclusively  Presbyte- 
rian," this  allegation  "  was  met,  not  by  complaints  of  its 
'  unchurching'  the  Church  of  England,  but  an  examina- 
tion of  its  matter  and  foundation."  However,  no  offi- 
cial document  of  this  Church  can  be  cited  in  which  we 
make  any  declaration  in  regard  to  the  status  of  any  of 
the  Denominations.  Nevertheless  it  should  be  admitted 
that  the  great  majority  of  our  Clergy,  and  many  of 
our  Laitj',  feel  that  the  unhistorical  Denominations  are 
at  best  defective  Churches.  It  is  evident  that  if  we  were 
to  entertain  such  feelings  without  good  and  sufficient 
reasons,  the  accusation  of  uncharitableness  might  justly 
be  made.    But  in  consideration  of  the  fact  that  all  of 

C.  A.— 22 


338 


OBJECTIONS    TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


I 


the  Denominations,  concerning  which  these  views  are  en- 
tertained, were  organized  at  least  fifteen  hundred  years 
after  the  time  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  and  that  they 
have  abandoned  certain  features  both  of  doctrine  and 
government  which  had  always  been  universally  regarded 
by  Catholic  Christians  as  essential  to  the  constitution  of 
a  true  Church,  and  are  still  so  considered  by  fully  nine- 
tenths  of  Christendom,  we  may  justly  feel  ourselves  ag- 
grieved at  being  stigmatized  as  narrow,  exclusive  bigots 
because  we  refuse  to  go  contrary  to  all  tradition  and  to 
the  conviction  of  the  great  majority  of  living  Christians, 
by  recognizing  the  organizations  of,  for  example,  Luth- 
er, Calvin,  and  Wesley,  all  less  than  three  hundred  and 
fifty  years  old,  as  Apostolic  and  Catholic  Churches  of 
Christ. 

It  is  argued  that  the  prosperity  which  has  attended 
the  organizations  which  they  represent,  is  an  evidence 
of  God's  favor,  and  of  his  special  recognition  of  them. 
Some,  therefore,  would  have  us  believe  that  as  St.  Paul, 
who,  having  had  no  connection  with  Christ  and  His 
Apostles,  was  specially  called  out  of  season  to  be  an 
Apostle,  so  they  have  been  called  out  of  due  time  to  be 
Churches.  But  the  analogy  is  not  complete  enough  to 
hold.  The  claims  of  St.  Paul,  because  of  the  miracles 
which  he  performed,  were  recognized  by  the  i-est  of  the 
Apostles.  Moreover,  he  did  not  found  a  new  Church. 
On  the  contrary  he  constantly  condemned  divisions  and 
illustrated  the  importance  of  unity  by  the  strongest 
imagery.  If  God,  through  the  founders  of  the  various 
Denominations,  had  really  called  new  Churches  into 
existence.  He  would  certainly  have  caused  them  to  have 
been  recognized  by  the  undoubted  Historic  Churches,  as 
St.  Paul's  Apostleship  was  by  the  original  Apostles. 
But  none  of  them  are  in  communion  with  any  branch 
of  the  old  Church. 


BIGOTED    AND    EXCLUSIVE. 


339 


Nor  will  the  argument  based  upon  the  rapid  prog- 
ress and  great  size  of  some  of  the  Denominations,  carry 
conviction  to  the  thoughtful.  The  schism  in  the  Jew- 
ish Church  comprised  ten  tribes,  while  only  two  re- 
mained faithful  to  the  old  Church  which  was,  neverthe- 
less, the  true  Church  of  God.  No  modern  Denomination 
has  had  a  more  phenomenal  growth  than  Arianism. 
In  the  short  space  of  fifty  years  it  sprang  up  and 
drew  almost  half  of  Christendom  after  it,  and  numbered 
among  its  millions  of  adherents,  the  Roman  Emperors 
and  Eulers.  But  Arianism  was  not,  therefore,  a  part  of 
the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ.  Granting,  however,  for  the 
sake  of  argument,  that  the  question  of  Catholicity  can 
be  decided  by  the  number  of  adherents  to  a  system,  the 
verdict  must  be,  as  matters  now  stand  and  have  stood 
ever  since  the  Reformation,  against  the  pretensions  of 
the  Denominations  to  Catholicity.  For  there  are  cer- 
tainly not  more  than  fifty  millions  of  them,  while  there 
are  three  hundred  and  fifty  millions  of  us.  Thus,  fi'ora 
whatever  point  of  view,  it  is  impossible  for  the  Denom- 
inations to  make  good  against  the  Episcopal  Church 
the  accusation  of  uncharitableness. 


But  let  us  now  examine  this  charge  of  exclusiveness 
from  another  point  of  view.  There  are  almost  always 
two  ways  of  looking  at  such  questions.  As  we  look  at 
it,  those  who  make  the  accusation  are  really  the  violat- 
ors of  charity.  And  this  because  upon  uncharitable 
grounds  they  have  withdrawn  from  the  Mother  Church, 
and  have  fenced  themselves  in  with  new  conditions  of 
Church  membership,  and  excluded  all,  who,  for  any  rea- 
son, do  net  see  fit  to  comply  with  the  novel  require- 
ments. Rome  and  the  Denominations  are  alike  in  this 
respect.    The  older  Sectarian  bodies  went  out  from  us, 


840 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


( 


not  because  we  were  too  narrow  and  bigoted,  but  be- 
cause they  themselves  were  not  broad  and  tolerant 
enough  to  remain  in  the  ancient  and  spacious  fold.  We 
are  well  aware  that  it  is  often  maintained  that  they 
were  driven  out.  It  would  be  an  easy  task  to  prove  to 
the  contrary  by  evidence  that  might  be  accumulated 
from  almost  every  page  of  the  Reformation  histories. 
But  there  is  a  much  shorter  cut  to  the  truth.  It  is  by 
showing  that  this  way  of  accounting  for  the  origin  of 
the  first  sects  proves  quite  too  much.  If  their  with- 
drawal was  due  to  the  parent's  intolerance,  what  are  we 
to  conclude  in  the  case  of  the  sects  which  soon  sprang 
from  themselves?  The  census  shows  that  in  the  United 
States,  the  Presbyterians  have  divided  and  sub-divided 
twelve  times ;  the  Baptists  have  done  the  same  thirteen 
times,  and  the  Methodists  seventeen  times.  If  the  orig- 
inal Denominations  could  truthfully  account  for  their 
exodus  on  the  score  of  illiberality,  why  may  not  those 
who  sprang  from  them  justify  their  separation  on  the 
same  ground  ?  Out  of  the  five  or  six  Denominations  of 
the  Revolutionary  period,  have  come  one  hundred  and 
forty-three.  Excepting  the  Episcopal  and  Roman 
Churches,  each  of  these  accounts  for  its  existence  by  at- 
tributing intolerance  to  its  Mother.  As  only  three  or 
four  of  all  the  Denominations  now  in  the  country  are 
the  direct  offspring  of  the  Episcopal  and  Roman  Com- 
munions, it  follows  that  about  one  hundred  and  forty 
of  them  must  be  traced,  if  the  theory  of  the  origin  of 
sects  under  consideration  be  correct,  to  the  bigotry 
of  the  Methodists,  Lutherans,  Baptists,  Presbyterians, 
Mennonites,  Adventists,  and  the  rest  of  the  long  list 
which  is  ever  growing  longer.  Thus,  if  the  Episcopal 
Church  be  exclusive,  it  would  appear  that  none  of  the 
older  Denominations  are  in  a  position  to  stone  her  for 
the  fault. 


BIGOTED    AND    EXCLUSIVE. 


341 


\ 


But  the  theory  of  maternal  intolerance  is  not  the 
true  solution  of  sectarianism.    It  is  due  rather  to  the 
exclusiveness  and  bigotry  of  the  child  itself.    There  is  of 
course  a  sense  in  which  the  Episcopal  Church  is  exclu- 
sive.   She  must,  as  a  branch  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
exclude  from  membership  all  who  do  not  accept  Christ 
as  the  Divine  Saviour  of  the  world,  and  from  her  com- 
munion all  open  and  notorious  evil  livers.    She  is  in- 
deed fenced  about  by  the  Catholic  Creeds  and  the  Moral 
Law,  but  there  is  nothing  of  human  construction  to  keep 
people  out.    The  only  fence  that  exists,  was  constructed 
by  God  Himself  through  Moses,  the  Apostles  and  Ecu- 
menical  Councils.     But   the   Denominations   did   not 
consider  this  fence  of  Divine  regulation  sufficient.    They 
felt  called  upon  to  supplement  it  by  hedges  of  their  own 
planting.    The  Presbyterians  were  determined  literally 
to  wall  us  in  with  the  '^Westminster  Confession;"  the 
Baptists  insisted  on  surrounding  us  with  a  deep  moat 
filled  to  the  brim  with  water ;  the  Methodists  wanted  to 
hedge  us  about  with  their  peculiar  doctrines  of  saving 
faith,  instantaneous  conversion  and  experimental  re- 
ligion.   The  Church  did  not  deny  her  children  the  privi- 
lege of  holding  the  views  of  Calvin,  Williams  and  Wesley, 
but  she  refused  to  allow  these  views  to  become  so  many 
barriers  to  membership  and  communion.    It  was  held 
that  inasmuch  as  the  Church  is  a  Divine  institution, 
God  alone  has  a  right  to  impose  conditions  of  entrance. 
And  because  the  rest  of  the  flock  refused  to  be  hedged  in, 
the  sectaries  withdrew,  in  order  that  their  ideas  might 
be  carried  out  in  their  own  narrow  enclosure. 
/    "  It  strikes  one,"  says  Bishop  Thompson,  "  as  rather 
/a  queer  thing  that  these  people   should   charge   the 
/  Church  with  *  exclusiveness ; '  that  they   should  take 
I    their  own  special  sin  and  lay  it  on  her  shoulders.    They 
I    each  had  their  birth  in  exclusiveness.    The  Church  wafl 


V   ' 


\ 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE   EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 

not  holy  enough  nor  orthodox  eiotlgb,  aM  so  the  sect 
was  created  to  exclude  all  but  the  saints.  This  is  the 
historic  becriuning  of  every  sect.  It  excludes  all  but 
Itself  from  the  Kingdom  of  God.  With  the  early  Puri- 
tans, whatever  was  outside  of  Puritanism  was  of  Satan. 
The  Church,  especially,  was  of  the  evil  one.  The  only 
body  in  the  land  which  demands  only  Christianity  as  a 
test  of  membership,  which  does  not  supplement  Chris- 
tianity with  some  ism  as  an  essential  to  fellowship,  is 
the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church." 

Bishop  Vail's  remarks  concerning  the  comprehen- 
siveness of  the  Church  as  compared  with  Denomination- 
alism  are  also  to  the  point  and  equally  forcible  : 

*'TheChurch  is  founded  upon  unity  and  universality; 

"Sectarianism  is  founded  upon  unity  without  univer- 
salitv. 

"  The  dtirch  is  founded  upon  law  and  liberty ; 
"Sectarianism  is  founded  upon  law  without  liberty. 
"The  Church  is  founded  upon  conformity  and  com- 
promise ; 

"Sectarianism  is  foiinded  upli  conformity  without 
compromise. 

"The  Church  in  its  practical  operation  produces  for- 
bearance ; 

"Sectarianism  in  its  practical  operation  produces 
intolerance." 

The  comprehensiveness  of  the  P]piscopal  Church  is 
manifest  from  the  fact  that  she  contains  so  many  dif- 
ferent schools  of  thought.  There  are  among  us  High, 
Low,  and  Broad  Churchmen.  These  differ  with  each 
other  on  as  many  points  and  as  radically  as  do  the  var- 
ious Denominations,  and  yet  there  is  as  much  unity  and 
harmony  with  us  as  in  any  other  body  of  Christians. 
This  is  accounted  for  by  the  fact  that,  while  Episcopa- 
lians are  required  to  adhere  to  the  faith  set  forth  in  the 


LIKE   THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 


343 


Catholic  Creeds  and  to  submit  to  the  government  of  the 
Historic  Episcopate,  they  are,  in  respect  to  all  compar- 
atively indifferent  matters  of  doctrine  and  conduct,  per- 
mitted the  largest  liberty.  Under  such  circumstances 
men  always  form  themselves  into  parties.  For  example, 
in  this  "  land  of  the  free  "  we  have  at  present  Democrats, 
Republicans,  Populists,  and  others,  each  denouncing  the 
rest,  but  all  respecting  the  Constitution  and  the  powers 
that  be,  and  so,  paradoxical  as  it  may  seem  in  view  of 
our  wranghng,  we  are  really  one  of  the  most  united  and 
harmonious  of  nations.  The  opinion  prevails  with 
Americans  that  the  country  is  upon  the  whole  the  better 
for  political  combinations  and  agitations.  Episcopa- 
lians generallv  feel  the  same  about  their  divisions  into 
Schools  of  Chiirchmanship.  It  is  thought  that,  if  there 
were  a  dead  level  of  agreement  among  us,  our  Ecclesias- 
tical waters  would  soon  become  stagnant. 

Ill 
*. 

VII. 

LIKE  THE  ROMAN  CATHOLIC. 

THIS  objection  so  frequently  urged  against  the  vari- 
ous branches  of  the  Anglican  Communion,  is 
based  upon  partly  real  and  partly  imaginary  re- 
semblances in  her  system  to  that  of  the  Roman  Church. 
That  there  are  some  striking  similarities  we  are  ready 
enough  to  admit,  but  that  they  are  of  a  character  to 
justify  the  conclusion  that  there  is  no  essential  difference 
between  theEp»copal  and  the  Roman  Church  cannot  be 
allowed.  For  there  are  many  important  doctrinal  and 
ceremonial  poiats  about  'which  we  differ  fundament- 
ally. And  even  where  the  resemblance  is  most  strik- 
ing, objectors  have  always  found  it  impossible  to  prove 
that  the  condemned  doctrine  or  ceremony  is  contrary  to 


344 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


Scriptore  or  the  teaching  aud  practice  of  the  earlier, 
purer  ages. 

The  objection,  in  short,  is  based  upon  the  erroneous 
idea,  that,  because  the  Church  of  Rome  has  erred  in 
many  points,  she  has  done  so  in  all,  and  that,  therefore, 
a  Church  is  reformed  only  in  proportion  as  she  has  de- 
parted from  the  Roman  faith  and  ritual.    This,  as  an 
old  writer  points  out,  is  because  ''  man  is  a  creature  of 
extremes.    The  middle  path  is  generally  the  wise  path ; 
but  there  are  few  wise  enough  to  find  it.    Because  Pap- 
ists have  made  too  much  of  some  things,  Protestants 
have  made  too  little  of  them.    The  Papists  treat  man 
as  all  sense;  and,  therefore,  some  Protestants  would 
treat  him  as  all  spirit.    Because  one  party  has  exalted 
the  Virgin  Mary  to  a  Divinity,  the  other  can  scarcelv 
think  of  that  *most  highly  favored   among  women' 
with  common  i-espect.    The  Papist  puts  the  Apocrypha 
into  his  Canon ;  the  Protestant  will  scarcely  regard  it 
as  an  ancient  record.    The  Popish  heresy,  human  merit 
in  justification,  drove  Luther,  on  the  other  side,  into  the 
most  unwarrantable  and  unscriptural  statements  of 
that  doctrine.    The  Papists  consider  grace  as  insepara- 
ble from  the  participation  in  the  Sacraments ;  the  Prot- 
estants too  oft^n   lose  sight  of  them   as  instituted 
means  of  conveying  gi^ace." 

Now,  it  is  the  glory  of  the  Episcopal  Church,  that  she 
has  avoided  both  the  extremes  of  Romanism  and  Prot- 
estantism. The  testimony  of  the  objectors  from  both 
quarters  proves  this.  For  the  representatives  of  each 
in  turn  accuse  us  of  being  identified  with  the  other. 
Romanists  declare  that  we  are  Protestants,  and  Prot- 
estants  constantly  represent  us  as  Romanists.  Their 
witness,  as  a  whole,  therefore  proves  that  we  are  neither 
the  one  nor  the  other.  We  are  essentially  unlike  either  of 
these  extreme  wings  of  Christendom.  Ve  occupy  the 


LIKE   THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 


345 


middle  ground  between  them.  Between  the  Scylla  and 
the  Charybdis  of  perverted  Catholicism  and  Protestant- 
ism, we  steer  the  middle  course,  having  inscribed  on 
our  banner  the  motto : 

"  Catholic  for  every  truth  of  God ; 
Protestant  against  every  error  of  man." 

The  fact  that  we  are  so  far  removed  from  both,  ac- 
counts for  the  mistake  which  each  makes  in  classing  us 
with  the  other. 

It  cannot  be  denied  that  there  is,  according  to  the 
tastes  and  preferences  of  our  Clergy  and  congregations, 
a  more  or  less  striking  resemblance  between  the  Roman 
and  Anglican  Communions  in  the  nonessentials  of  cere- 
monies and  ornaments.    But,  however  it  may  be  with 
Romanists  in  these  things,  Anglicans  almost  without 
exception  stop  short  of  superstition  and  idolatry.    If, 
indeed,  there  be  any  exceptions,  they  are  so  few  as  not 
to  disprove  the  general  rule  of  the  past  three  hundred 
years.    We  do  not  deny  that  there  are  a  few  among  us 
who  prefer  the  Ultramontane  nomenclature  and  ritual, 
and  indeed  persistently  use  them,  notwithstanding  their 
well-known  offensiveness  to  the  vast  majority  of  the 
Anglican  Communion.    But  the  extreme  Mediaeval  cere- 
monialism that  has  been  adopted  by  a  congregation  here 
and  there  of  which,  merely  because  of  its  exceptional 
character,  we  read  so  much,  is  not  at  all  representative 
of  the  Episcopal  Church  as  a  whole,  and  there  is  not  the 
ghost  of  a  probability  that  it  will  ever  become  so.  After 
all  these  years  there  is  not  on  an  average  more  than  one 
or  two  of  these  extremely  ritualistic  parishes  in  a  Dio- 
cese.    Our  Bishops,  Clergy,  and  Laity,  with  very  few 
exceptions,  will  never  consent  to  abandon  the  dignified 
position  which  we  occupy  as  the  American  branch  of  the 


i 


346 


OBJECTIONS   TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


LIKE    THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 


347 


historic  Catholic  Church  of  the  English  race.    As  such 
we  have  our  own  traditions,  customs  and  forms  of 
worship,  which  if  less  elaborate  and  showy,  are  more  in 
harmony  with  the  sturdy,  sober  qualities  of  the  Anglo- 
Saxon  people  than  anything  which  has  been  imported 
from  aesthetic,  gaudy  Italy.    If  there  must  be  imitation, 
let  Rome,  which  whether  from  a  political  or  intellectual 
point  of  view  is  much  more  likely  to  be  Anglicanized 
than  we  are  to  be  Romanized,  do  the  imitating.    The 
Anglican  Church  was  compelled  to  conform  more  or  less 
closely  to  the  Itahan  when  Rome  was  ''the  mistress  of 
the  world,"  but  now  that  the  position  of  the  English 
and  Latin-speaking  races  has  been  reversed,  the  Roman 
Church  must  in  her  turn  be  moulded  by  foreign  influence. 
In  the  Pastoral  Letter  delivered  at  the  close  of  the 
Triennial  General  Convention  held  in  Minneapolis  a.  d. 
1895,  the  Bishops  speaking  o!  the  Roman  terminology 
say  that  "it  involves  themanly  independence  of  a  Church 
rooted  in  the  primitive  soil  of  Christianity,  to  a  Church 
which  has  no  claim  upon  the  allegiance  of  the  English 
speaking  race."    Those  among  us  who  have  been  con- 
cerned lesf  the  Ritualists "  would  ultimately  lead  the 
Episcopal  Church  to  forsake  its  Reformation  principles 
and  surrender  to  Rome,  will  have  their  fears  allayed  by 
reading  that  section  of  the  Pastoral  which  bears  upon 
this  subject.    It  plainly  appears  from  this  timely  utter- 
ance that  the  few  Romanizers  among  us  cannot  reckon 
upon  the  support  of  the  Bishops,  without  which  the 
Church  as  a  whole  can  never  be  compromised.    Though 
the  great  majority  of  the  American  P]piscopate  are  pro- 
nounced high  Churchmen  and  some  of  them  have  a 
strong  predilection  for  Mediaeval  ceremonialism,  it  is 
understood  that  there  was  in  the  House  of  Bishops 
little'or  no  opposition  to  this  part  of  their  Epistle  to 
the  Council  and  Churches. 


But  the  existence  in  the  Church  of  those  who  reso- 
lutely have  turned  their  faces  towards  Mediaeval  doc- 
trine^ and  ritual,  is  no  more  to  be  regretted  than  the 
presence  of  such  as  persistently  fix  their  eyes  upon  the 
barren  and  disputatious  Puritanism  of  the  Reformation 
period.    One  has  as  much  right  among  us  as  the  other, 
for  the  doctrines  and  ceremonies  which  they  respectively 
represent,  are  in  the  main  utterly  alien  to  the  primitive 
Catholicity  of  which  the  Anglican  Communion  is  an  ex- 
ponent. Our  Church  claims  to  be  "  Catholic."   It  is  true 
that  the  word  does  not  appear  in  the  title,  but  neither 
does  it  in  the  oflftcial  designation  of  the  English  Church 
which,  nevertheless,  strenuously  insists  upon  her  Cath- 
olicity.    The    word    Catholic    occurs    in   our    Creeds 
which  to  us  are  of  much  greater  importance  than  our 
name,  as  must  be  evident  to  all  from  the  fact  that  we 
repeat  one  or  the  other  of  the  former  at  every  Service, 
and  seldom  use  the  latter  except  in  some  abbreviated 
form.    As  the  Church  of  England  is  no  less  Protestant 
than  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  United  States,  though 
the  term  has  not  been  officially  adopted  as  a  part  of 
her  api^ellation,  so  the  American  daughter  is  no  less 
Catholic  than  her  English  Mother,  notwithstanding  the 
absence  of  the  word  in  the  epithet  by  which  she  is  distin- 
guished from  the  various  Christian  bodies  of  this  coun- 
try.   Now  if  the  Episcopal  Church   is  really  what  it 
claims  to  be,  the   American   branch  of  the   Catholic 
Church,  it  must  make  room  for  all  who  accept  Christ 
as  their  Divine  Lord  and  only  Saviour,  and  who  engage 
by  God's  help  to  live  according  to  the  Gospel  rule  of 
life.    But  it  is  too  much  to  expect  that  all  who  agree  in 
dointr  this,  will  be  of  the  same  mind  about  other  things. 
We  find  among  us  men  and  women  who  look  at  subjects 
from  very  different  points  of  view.    Take  for  example, 
the  Reformation.    The  Mediaevalist  warmly  contends 


348 


OBJECTIONS   TO    THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


il 


that  in  some  respects,  especially  in  the  matter  of  ritual 
and  ornaments,  it  went  too  far,  while  his  Puritan 
brother  maintains  with  equal  warmth  that  it  did  not 
go  far  enough.  But  the  one  is  no  more  inclined  to 
Romanism  than  the  other  is  to  Denominationalism. 
Both  in  nine  hundred  and  ninety-nine  cases  out  of  a 
thousand  will  remain  just  where  they  are,  disputing 
with  one  another  about  nonessentials  while  agreeing 
concerning  essentials  and  communing  at  the  same 
Altar. 

There  is,  however,  some  ground  for  congratulation 
that  there  are  a  few  of  both  these  classes  of  extremists 
among  us.  The  positions  which  they  respectively  oc- 
cupy, being  almost  as  widely  separated  as  the  East  is 
from  the  West,  make  manifest  to  all  men  the  Catholicity 
of  the  Episcopal  Church.  There  is  no  other  bodv  of 
Christians  sufficiently  comprehensive  to  include  any- 
thing like  such  radical  divergences  in  either  doctrine  or 
ceremony.  The  all-inclusiveness  of  this  Church  is  in- 
comprehensible alike  to  Romanists  and  Denomination- 
alists.  They  will  not  tolerate  each  other,  and  they  can- 
not understand  a  Church  that  is  spacious  enough  to 
comprehend  within  the  same  fold  those  who  look  at 
things  fi-om  such  different  points  of  view.  But  how 
could  the  Episcopal  Church  make  good  her  claim  to 
Catholicity  unless  she  had  room  for  both  ?  The  Medise- 
valists  and  Puritans  who  are  among  us,  though  given 
to  disputing  with  each  other  about  what  the  rest  of  us 
regard  as  nonessentials,  are  nevertheless  orthodox  and 
exemplary  enough  touching  the  essentials  of  doctrine 
and  life.  They  adhere  unswervingly  to  "the  Faith  once 
delivered  to  the  Saints,"  and  persistently  endeavor  to 
make  the  precepts  and  example  of  Christ  their  rule  and 
pattern  of  life.  These  few  P^piscopalian  extremists  of  the 
right  hand  and  the  left  are  in  fact  as  good  Christians  as 


LIKE   THE    ROMAN   CATHOLIC. 


349 


the  average  among  the  host  of  their  conservative  breth- 
ren or  of  those  in  the  Roman  and  Denominational  Com- 
munions. We  cannot,  therefore,  deny  them  a  spiritual 
home  among  us  without  excluding  true  Christians,  nor 
can  we,  so  long  as  they  remain  within  canonical  and 
reasonable  bounds,  insist  upon  conformity,  on  the  part 
of  our  Mediaevalists  and  Puritans,  to  the  ideas  and  cer- 
emonials which  prevail  among  us,  without  becoming 
guilty  of  persecution.  The  Episcopal  Church  cannot, 
therefore,  reasonably  be  objected  to  upon  the  ground  of 

ritualism. 

Again,  it  must  be  remembered  that  there  are  also 
many  ceremonial  similarities  between  Denominational 
and  Roman  worship.  Consistency  would  require  those 
who  object  to  the  Episcopal  Church  upon  the  score  of 
ceremony,  to  become  Quakers,  or  even  to  give  up  public 
worship  altogether.  But  their  tendency  confessedly  is 
towards  an  elaborate  and  ornate  worship. 


I 


But,  say  our  objectors,  the  doctrines  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  are  such  as  to  convict  her  of  Romanism,  and, 
whatever  mav  be  said  of  ceremonials,  doctrines  are 
essentials.  Now,  it  must  also  be  confessed,  there  are 
many  doctrinal  parallels  between  the  Episcopal  and 
Roman  Churches.  The  same  may,  however,  be  said  of 
us  as  compared  with  the  various  Protestant  Denomi- 
nations, for  much  of  our  teaching  is  the  same  as 
theirs.  So  is  it,  moreover,  with  Denominationalists 
and  Romanists.  There  are  more  particulars  in  which 
their  faith  is  the  same,  than  will  be  readily  acknowl- 
edged by  those  who  have  never  been  at  the  pains  of 
making  a  comparison.  And  in  fact  if  it  were  not  so, 
the  Denominations  could  make  no  plausible  preten- 
sion to  orthodoxy.    For,  though  the  truth  of  all  that 


OBJECTIONS   TO   THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


H 


i 


is  said  concerning  the  errors  and  corruption  of  the 
Roman  Church  be  admitted,  yet  no  well-informed  per- 
son will  deny  that  she  holds  all  the  essential  doctrines 
of  Christianity.  Though  she  has  added  much  to  the 
Faith  as  outlined  by  the  Councils,  she  has  never  sub- 
tracted from  it.  For,  not  to  go  into  details,  she  has 
the  Bible,  the  Ancient  Creeds,  the  Ministry,  the  Sacra- 
ments, and  all  the  Christian  Ordinances.  Without  these, 
as  all  must  agiee,  there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  a  Catho- 
lic Church  of  Christ.  Therefore,  resemblances  to  Rome 
in  these  and  otheressentials  of  Catholicity,  do  not  consti- 
tute the  Episcopal  Church  Romish  but  Catholic.  We 
cannot,  with  justice,  be  identified  with  the  Roman 
Church  because  we  are  partakers  with  her  in  the  distin- 
guishing features  of  the  Church  of  the  Apostles,  and  of 
the  earliest  ages.  It  is  unjust  to  accuse  us  of  Roman- 
ism unless  we  consent  to  and  teach  the  errors  which  are 
peculiar  to  the  Church  of  Rome.  From  these  offenses 
we  are  as  innocent  as  any  body  of  Christians  on  earth. 

But  in  condemning  and  renouncing  the  Papal  addi- 
tions to  the  Catholic  Faith,  with  the  corruptions 
growing  out  of  them,  we  were  careful  not  to  follow 
Denominationalists  in  subtracting  from  that  doctrine 
whicli  has  been  believ^ed  always,  everywhere,  and  by  the 
vast  majority  of  Christians.  This  is  the  true  Catholic 
Faith  which  the  Anglican  Communion,  of  which  the 
Episcopal  Church  is  a  part,  holds  "  whole  and  undefiled," 
without  the  additions  of  Romanists,  orthe  subtractions 
of  Denominationalists.  And  because  we  are  neither  plus 
nor  minus  touching  this  Faith,Romanist8  contend  that 
we  are  Denominationalists,  and  they,  that  we  are 
Romanists,  whereas  we  are  neither  the  one  nor  the 
other,  but  true  Catholics. 

There  can  be  no  doubt  that  both  Romanists  and 
Protestants  hold  to  a  great  deal  of  truth,  but  too 


LIKE    THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 


351 


often  it  is  opposite  halves  of  the  same  truth;  and  a 
half  truth,  as  we  all  know,  frequently  has  the  effect  of  a 
whole  error.    It  will  usually  be  found  by  the  candid 
investigator   that   the   Episcopal  Church  holds   both 
halves  of  the  truth.    Take  for  example  her  doctrine  con- 
cerning the  nature  and  efficacy  of  the  Sacraments  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  Since  the  Reformation, 
as  in  the  age  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  Anglo-Catho- 
lics connect  salvation  with   the  Sacraments  and  with 
faith  and  repentance.    All  that  is  Scriptural  and  essen- 
tial in  the  Roman  and  Denominational  views  of  the 
efficacy  of  the  Sacraments,  we  hold.    For  with  the  one 
we  agree  that:  "The  Sacraments  are  generally  neces- 
sary to   salvation  and  that  they  work  invisibly  in  us 
and  do  not  only  quicken,  but  also  strengthen  and  con- 
firm our  faith  in  Christ ; "  and  with  the  others,  we  agree 
that  the  Sacraments  "have  a  wholesome  effect   and 
operation  in  such  only  as  worthily  receive  the  same  by  a 
death  unto  sin,  and  a  new  birth  unto  righteousness,  by 
repenting  themselves  truly  of  their  former  sins,  by  hav- 
ing a  lively  faith  in  God's  mercy  through  Christ  with  a 
thankful  remembrance  of  His  death,  and  by  being  in 
charity  with  all  men." 

Take  also  our  doctrine  about  confession  and  absolu- 
tion which,is  such  a  bugbear  to  many  Protestants  with- 
in as  well  as  without  the  Anglican  Communion,  who  have 
never  taken  the  pains  to  inform  themselves  of  the  funda- 
mental difference  between  our  teaching  and  that  of  the 
Roman  Church.  Doubtless  there  are  among  us  those 
who  practically  hold  the  Romish  dogma,  but  the  view 
which  prevails  with  our  Clergy  and  intelligent  Laity,  and 
which  alone  can  be  justified  by  our  standards,  looks 
very  much  like  a  compromise  between  the  extremes  of 
Romanism  and  Denominationalism,  though,  as  a  mat- 
ter of  fact,  it  is  simply  that  w^hich  is  taught  in  the  New 


ilHi 

'IliH! 


m 


OBJECTIONS    TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


Testament.  This  will  appear  from  the  followiog  dia- 
logue between  a  Presbyterian  lady  and  an  ex-Methodist 
minister  friend  of  mine  who  had  just  made  application 
for  Holy  Orders  in  the  Episcopal  Church. 

L.  "How  strange  to  think  that  you  left  the  Metho- 
dists to  become  an  Episcopalian.  Do  you  believe  in  the 
confessional?" 

Ex.  M.  "Why,  yes,  I  believe  with  the  Episcopal 
Church  that  it  is  our  duty  and  privilege  to  confess  our 
sins  to  God,  and,  yet,  if  any  are  troubled  in  their  con- 
science and  wish  advice  concerning  any  besetting  sin 
or  to  make  any  confession  to  their  pastor  so  as  to 
receive  encouragement  in  the  Christian  life,  I  believe 
they  should  have  the  privilege  of  doing  so.  But  of 
course  I  do  not  believe  in  the  Roman  confessional,  that 
is,  an  obligatory  confession  of  faults  and  sins  in  detail 
as  a  prerequisite  to  the  reception  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion." 

L.  "Well,  I  am  glad  to  be  set  right  in  this,  as  in  the 
future  I  shall  feel  somewhat  more  comfortable  about 
the  Episcopal  Church.  No  reasonable  objection  can  be 
offered  to  such  a  confession,  for  in  one  form  or  another 
it  obtains  to  some  degree  in  all  Protestant  Denomina- 
tions. But  how  about  Priestly  Absolution?  Do  you 
believe  in  that?" 

Ex.  M.  "Yes,  I  do;  and  I  think  that  I  can  also 
remove  your  prejudice  against  the  Episcopal  Church 
so  far  as  it  is  due  to  a  misunderstanding  on  this  point. 
I  believe  that  our  Heavenly  Father  is  always  ready 
to  forgive  His  erring  children  when  they  come  to  Him 
in  true  penitence  confessing  their  sins.  And  He  is  so 
anxious  to  keep  this  truth  before  their  minds  that  He 
has  not  only  caused  it  to  be  written  in  His  Word  that 
He  is  ready  to  forgive  iniquity,  transgression  and  sin, 
but  so  great  is  His  love  that  He  has  commissioned 


LIKE   THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 


353 


His  ministers,  or  Priests,  to  preach  repentance  and 
remission  of  sins  to  all  men  in  His  name,  and  to  pro- 
nounce absolution  to  all  who  truly  and  earnestly  repent, 
that  the  penitent  may  have  every  encouragement  to 
trust  Him." 

L.  "I  have  no  objection  to  that  kind  of  Priestly 
Absolution.  It  is  a  very  different  thing  from  the  teach- 
ing of  the  Roman  Church,  that  would  deny  the  penitent 
the  privilege  of  trusting  alone  in  the  promises  of  God 
for  pardon,  and  compel  him  to  receive  absolution  from 
Priests." 

Ex.  M.  "The  fact  is,  Mrs.  ,  that  many  Protes- 
tants, in  their  efforts  to  get  away  from  the  errors  and 
corruptions  of  Rome,  have  gone  to  the  other  extreme. 
It  is  often  said  that  the  I']piscopal  Church  is  more 
like  the  Roman  Church  than  any  other,  and  there 
is  a  sense  in  which  this  is  true.  Those  that  are  least 
like  her  are  the  Quakers.  Except  the  Bible  they  have 
thrown  away  almost  everything;  the  Sacraments  of 
Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper,  Confirmation,  an  Or- 
dained Ministry,  the  Creed,  and  so  far  as  possible  all 
ceremonies  are  laid  aside,  and  the  inner  Light  is 
exalted  until  it  is  not  to  be  tested  or  measured  either 
by  reason  or  Revelation;  while  the  Enghsh  Church 
aimed  only  to  throw  aside  the  errors  and  corruptions 
of  Rome,  retaining  all  that  was  Scriptural,  Apostolic, 
primitive  and  Catholic  in  worship.  The  motto  of  this 
Church  is  ^ Prove  all  things;  hold  fast  that  which  is 
good.'" 


But  let  us  see  how  the  assertion  that  we  are  like  the 
Roman  Catholics,  can  be  proven  untrue,  those  who 
make  it  being  themselves  the  judges.  After  making  it 
they  usually  proceed  to  tell  their  auditors  or  readers 


C.  A.— 28 


854 


OBJECTIONS   TO    THE    EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 


i"f 


I 


Is 


i  ^  (.■ 


about  "the  ignorant,  superstitious,  degraded,  priest- 
ridden  condition  of  Romanists."  Now  I  am  not  called 
upon  to  pronounce  upon  the  truth  or  falsity  of  this 
severe  indictment  of  Romanism.  I  simply  direct  atten- 
tion to  it  in  order  that  the  utter  inconsistency  of  those 
who  make  it,  may  appear.  For  if  there  be  any  truth  in 
what  they  say  concerning  the  resemblance  of  Episcopa- 
lianism  to  Romanism,  their  description  of  the  members  of 
the  Roman  Church  ought  to  apply  to  Episcopalians.  But 
all  the  world  knows  that  such  a  representation  of  our 
constituency  would  be  simply  ridiculous.  In  fact,  those 
who  pass  this  judgment  upon  Romanism  are  the  same 
who  reflect  upon  the  Episcopal  Church  by  representing 
her  as  made  up  almost  exclusively  of  the  aristocratic 
and  dominant  elements  of  the  country.  "By  their 
fruits  ye  shall  know  them.''  Surely  those  who  assert 
that  the  Episcopal  Church  is  like  the  Roman  Catholic 
do  not  regard  this  precept.  In  fact  they  know  and 
admit,  and  even  emphasize  the  dissimilarity  of  the 
fruit,  and  yet  declare  the  identity  of  the  trees.  *'Do 
men  gather  grapes  of  thorns,  or  figs  of  thistles  ?  "  '*  Con- 
sistency, thou  art  a  jewel ! " 

The  fact  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is  sonon-Ronmn, 
and  has  done  more  than  any  of  the  Denominations  to 
correct  the  errors  and  weaken  the  power  of  the  Papacy, 
while  at  the  same  time  she  has  been  wise  and  conserva- 
tive enough  to  hold  fast  to  that  which  is  essential  to 
Catholicity,  as  also  to  many  nonessentials  which  are 
nevertheless  good  and  ancient,  will,  in  proportion  as 
prejudice  gives  place  to  candor,  come  to  be  regarded  as 
one  of  the  chief  reasons  for  identification  with  this 
Church  rather  than  with  any  of  the  revolutionary  De- 
nominations. In  the  long  run  sensible  men  and  women 
may  be  trusted  to  perceive  the  absurd  character  of 
objections  to  our  Church  based  upon  mere  resemblances 


LIKE    THE    ROMAN    CATHOLIC. 

to  the  Church  of  Rome.    Our  unreasonable  objectors 
sometimes  talk  as  if  one  of  the  chief  aims  of  the  Church 
should  be  to  render  itself  as  much  unlike  the  Roman 
Church  as  possible.    We  have  little  use  for  Rome,  but  if 
we  were  to  adopt  that  policy,  we  should  be  about  as 
wise  as  a  family  would  be  to  discard  their  cook-stove 
because  their  neighboring  enemies  have  one.    Such  a 
course  would  starve  the  Anglican  Communion  into  the 
proportions  of  a  sect,  and  give  ftomanism  such  an  op- 
portunity to  triumph  as  she  will  never  have,  so  long  as 
we  maintain  the  advantage  of  a  position  which  includes 
the  essential  elements  of   both  Ultramontanism  and 
Protestantism  without  their  extravagances  and  errors. 
The  late  Bishop  of  Louisiana  expressed  the  conclusion 
of  the  whole  matter,  when,  in  the  course  of  his  reply  to 
some  objector  to  the  Episcopal  Church,  he  observed, 
"  After  all  she  is  to  the  various  Denominations  what  the 
town  clock  is  to  the  citizens,  a  regulator.    Though  no 
one  seems  to  be  satisfied  with  the  time,  some  affirming 
that  it  is  too  slow,  others  that  it  is  too  fast,  and  all 
agreeing  that  it  is  utterly  unreliable,  yet  in  the  long  run 
the  great  majority  set  their  watches  by  it." 

On  the  general  subject  of  objections  to  the  Episcopal 
Church  it  may  l^  observed  that  there  is  nothing  which 
either  Romaiiists  or  Denominationalists  urge  against 
us,  that  is  not  trifling  in  comparison  with  their  own 
serious  additions  to  or  subtractions  from  the  Faith  and 
Government  to  which  the  undivided  Church  of  the  flrst 
one  thousand  years  adhered.    We  confess  to  many  im- 
perfections but  they  are  of  a  superflcial  charact-er  and 
do  not  touch  the  essentials  of  the  Catholic  Creed  or 
Polity.     This  was  not  true  of  us  in  Mediaeval  times. 
Like  the  whole  of  Western  Christendom  we  fell  into 
many  gross  errors  and  superstitions  of  which  Rome  has 
always  been  the  synonym,  but  of  these  we  rid  ourselves 


356 


OBJECTIONS   TO    THE    EPISCOPAL   CHURCH. 


at  the  Keformation.  Since  that  memorable  event  the 
Church  of  the  English-speaking  race  has  been  the  most 
Scriptural  and  Apostolic  of  all  the  branches  of  the 
Catholic  Church. 

But  again  we  must  heed  the  precept  of  Solomon's 
proverb:  '*  Let  another  man  praise  thee  and  not  thine 
own  mouth:  a  stranger  and  not  thine  own  lips.'' 
Speaking  of  the  English  Church,  which  is  the  Mother  of 
the  Anglican  Communion,  the  great  commentator 
among  the  Methodists  says:  ''I  consider  the  Church  of 
England  the  purest  National  Church  in  the  world." 
"  We  remember,"  says  an  eloquent  Presbyterian  writer, 
"the  former  Services  which  the  Episcopal  Church  ren- 
dered to  the  cause  of  truth,  and  of  the  world's  redemp- 
tion ;  we  remember  the  bright  and  ever-living  lights  of 
truth,  which  her  Clergy  and  her  illustrious  Laymen  have 
in  other  times  enkindled  in  the  darkness  of  this  world's 
history,  and  which  continue  to  pour  their  pure  and 
steady  lustre  on  the  literature,  the  laws,  and  the  cus- 
toms of  the  Christian  world ;  and  we  trust  the  dav  will 
never  come,  when  our  own  bosoms,  or  the  bosoms  of 
Christians  in  any  Denomination,  will  cease  to  beat  with 
emotions  of  lofty  thanksgiving  to  the  God  of  grace, 
that  He  raised  up  such  gifted  and  holy  men  to  meet  the 
corruptions  of  the  Papacy,  and  to  breast  the  wicked- 
ness of  the  world." 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


LECTURE  YIl. 

WHY  AA\ERICANS  SHOULD   BE  EPISCOPALIANS, 

I.  The  Episcopal  Church  Apostolic. 

IL  The  Church  of  Our  Race. 

in.  A  Valid  Ministry. 

IV.  Superior  Opportunities. 

V.  Doctrinal  Stability. 

VI.  Christian  Unity. 


(357) 


m 


AUTHORITIES. 


Brittan,  An  Apology  for  Conforming  to  the  Protestant  Episco- 
pal Church,  Contained  in  a  Series  of  Letters  Addressed  to  Bishop 
Onderdonk,  New  York. 

Clark,  Walk  About  Zion. 

Clarke,  Christian  Union  and  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 

Faussett,  The  Claims  of  the  Established  Church  to  Exclusive 
Attachment  and  Support— Bampton  Lectures,  1820. 

Hammond,  John  Wesley  "  Being  Dead,  Yet  Speaketh." 

Heygate,  Why  I  Am  a  Churchman. 

Little,  A.  W.,  Reasons  for  Being  a  Churchman. 

Mines,  A  Presbyterian  Looking  for  the  Church. 

O'Neill,  Christian  Unity. 

Percival,  The  Glories  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 

Shields,  The  United  Church  of  the  United  States. 

Vail,  Bp.,  The  Comprehensive  Church. 

PAMPHLETS. 
Dudley,  Bp.,  Why  I  Am  a  Churchman. 
Hopkins,  Wm.  C,  Reasons  Why  I  Am  a  Churchman. 
Meade,  Bp.,  Reasons  for  Loving  the  Episcopal  Church. 
Randall,  Bp.,  Why  I  Am  a  Churchman. 
SwoPE,  Why  I  Am  an  Episcopalian. 
Vincent,  Bp.,  An  Address  on  Church  Unity. 

Wesley,  Reasons  Against  a  Separation  from  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land. 


MISCELLANEOUS. 

The  Good  Way,  or  Why  Christians  of  Every  Name  May  Be- 
come Churchmen, 


(858) 


Why  Americans  Should  Be 
Episcopalians. 

EVERY  right-thiDkibg  person  will  readily  give  his 
consent  to  the  proposition  that  in  the  choice  of 
a  Church,  reference  should  be  had  to  God's  will 
and  the  promotion  of  one's  own  salvation  and  that  of 
the  world.  The  object  of  this  lecture  is  to  show  that 
by  uniting  with  the  Episcopal  Church,  Americans  will 
be  most  Hkely  to  accomplish  these  important  ends. 


I. 

THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH  APOSTOLIC. 

IF  this  Church  could  not  historically  and  doctrinally 
make  good  the  claim  to  be  a  part  of  Christ's  One, 
Holy,  CathoHc  and  Apostolic  Church,  it  would  be 
impossible  to  show^  that  Americans  are  under  any  Divine 
obligation  to  identify  themselves  with  her.  That  the 
Mother  Church  of  England  is  a  true  branch  of  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  that  the  American  Church  is  iden- 
tical  with  the  parent  stalk  in  all  features  essential  to 
Catholicity,  are  propositions  which,  as  we  have  shown,* 
cannot  be  (questioned  without  a  total  disregard  of  the 
most  obvious  facts  of  history.  The  close  and  vital  con- 
nection between  the  two  Churches  is  evident  from  the 
mere  fact  that  they  are  in  the  most  cordial  and  complete 
communion.  Our  Bishops  sit  with  the  English  and 
colonial  Bishops  at  the  Pan-Anglican  Council  once  m 


*  Lectures  IV  and  V. 


(359) 


It 


360 


WHY    AMERICANS    SUOUId    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


^^- 


every  ten  years.  The  Clergy  of  all  ranks  exchange  min- 
istrations.  A  communicant  in  good  standing  in  one 
Church  is  recognized  as  such  in  the  other.  This  inter- 
communion could  never  have  existed  and  would  not  be 
maintained,  but  for  the  fact  that  the  Church  of  England 
and  the  American  Episcopal  Church  are  substantially 
the  same  in  all  essentials  of  government,  doctrine  and 
worship.  They  are,  therefore,  manifestly  different 
branches  of  the  same  vine.  And  that  this  vine  has  its 
root  in  Christ,  through  the  Apostles,  is  evident  from  the 
fact  that  it  can  be  traced  down  the  ages  in  unbroken 
continuity.  Furthermore,  representatives  of  the  Church 
of  England  occupied  undisputed  seats  in  the  early  Gen- 
eral Councils,  and  she  was  universally  recognized  as  a 
true  branch  of  the  Apostolic  Church  of  Christ  down 
to  the  time  of  the  Reformation.  And  if  she  was  this 
until  then,  she  is  still  the  same,  for  the  present  Church 
of  England  is  identical  with  that  which  was  before  the 
Reformation.* 

Of  course  the  non  church  member  who  has  made  up 
his  mind  to  obey  Christ  by  identifying  himself  with  His 
Kingdom,  will  be  told  by  the  representatives  of  each  of 
the  Protestant  Denominations  that  their  respective 
bodies  are  true  branches  of  the  Church  of  Christ.  I  do 
not  feel  called  upon  to  go  through  the  long  list  of  three 
hundred  or  more  for  the  purpose  of  investigating  their 
claims,  nor  to  pronounce  upon  them.  It  is  only  neces- 
sary that  the  reader  should  be  put  upon  some  short  and 
plain  way  of  coming  to  the  truth  by  personal  investiga- 
tion. You  will  not  be  deceived  into  accepting  a  Church 
as  Apostolic  and  Catholic  which  is  not  such,  if  you  will 
simply  trace  its  history  back  to  the  beginning,  or 
ascertain  whether  or  not  it  is  or  ever  has  been  in  com- 
munion with  any  unquestioned  branch  of  the  historic 

*  Lecture  IV. 


THE   CHURCH    OF    OUR    RACE. 


361 


Church.  If  you  are  advised  to  join  a  Church  which  can- 
not trace  its  lineage  to  the  Apostles,  or  which  is  not 
and  never  was  recognized  by  any  Church  which  indis- 
putably has  come  down  from  the  first  centuries  as 
being  a  branch  of  the  Apostolic  Church,  reject  it  as 
a  human  institution  that  has  no  Divine  claim  to  your 
allegiance.  The  American  Episcopal  Church  can  stand 
both  of  these  proposed  tests,  and  therefore  non  church 
members  and  members  of  human  religious  societies  can 
make  no  mistake  in  uniting  with  her,  for  so  they  will 
certainly  be  doing  the  will  of  God  by  identifying  them- 
selves with  a  true  branch  of  His  Church. 


II. 

THE  CHURCH  OF  OUR  RACE. 

BUT  some  one  may  ask,  why  not  join  the  Roman 
Church  and  have  done  with  it— why  stop  midway 
between  Sectarianism  and  Romanism?    We  an- 
swer because  there  is  absolutely  nothing  in  the  way  of 
Catholicity  to  be  gained,  while  in  other  respects  much 
would  be  lost  by  so  doing. 

God,  by  a  wonderful  Providence,  has  made  this  an 
English-speaking  Protestant  country.  It  is  true  that 
the  first  discoverers  and  some  of  the  settlers  of  the 
Western  Hemisphere  were  Italians  and  Spaniards,  but 
the  discoveries  and  conquests  made  under  the  flag  of 
Spain  are  of  very  little  concern  to  us.  As  the  Bishop  of 
Iowa  has  aptly  observed :  "  Our  interest  as  a  race  and 
as  a  nation  centers  in  the  discovery  of  the  North  Ameri- 
can continent  on  June  24,  St.  John  Baptist  Day,  1497, 
by  Cabot  sailing  under  the  authority  of  King  Henry 
VII.  of  England.  It  is  on  the  ground  of  this  priority  of 
discovery  of  the  continent  that  the  English  Crown  and 


m 


IHI" 


anas  WHY    AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 

Commonwealth  based  their  claim  to  occupy  the  West. 
It  was  in  consequence  of  this  discovery  of  the  continent 
by  Cabot,  and  in  pursuance  of  this  asserted  right  to 
people  the  land  on  which  the  cross  of  England's  Church 
had  been  first  planted,  and  to  which  the  arms  of  Eng- 
land had  been  affixed  by  Cabot,  that  the  great  histori- 
cal fact  is  due  that  we,  the  people  of  these  United  States, 
are  neither  by  discovery,  by  colonization,  by  civiliza- 
tion, by  race,  by  institution  nor  by  faith,  Spanish  or 
Koman.  The  Latin  race  and  the  Latin  Church  were 
granted  by  Divine  Providence  the  opportunities  of 
planting  their  colonies  and  attempting  the  conversion 
of  the  Aborigines  of  the  Western  Hemisphere.  God 
willed  it  that  in  this  Western  World  there  should  be  wit- 
nessed the  struggle  between  the  two  races,  the  two 
civilizations,  the  two  ideas  of  liberty,  the  two  faiths, 
the  one  of  the  English  Church  and  State,  and  the  other 
of  the  Latin  people  and  belief.  It  is  this  struggle  for  a 
continent  which  has  determined  our  origin  as  a  people, 
the  nature  of  our  institutions,  our  civil  and  Ecclesias- 
tical liberties,  our  common  laws,  our  forms  and  features, 
our  very  speech,  our  present  standing  and  glory  among 
the  nations  of  the  earth,  our  civilization,  our  culture 
and  our  Chnstianity.'^ 

Since  the  memorable  commemoration  of  the  four 
hundredth  anniversary  of  the  discoveries  by  Columbus, 
Komanists  have  been  assiduousl3^  claiming  a  large 
share  of  the  credit  for  the  wonderful  development  of 
this  country.  The  unsophisticated  would  naturally 
infer  from  what  I^eo  XIII.  says  in  a  recently  published 
encyclical,  that  Columbus  and  the  Spaniards  not 
only  discovered  the  North  American  Continent,  but 
also  colonized,  civilized,  and  created  the  United  States. 
The  Pope,  as  one  of  his  caustic  newspaper  critics  points 
out,  seems  to  have  forgotten  that  it  was  Englishmen 


THE   CHURCH    OF    OUR    RACE. 


363 


and  their  descendants,  mostly  Protestants,  who  did  all 
this.  The  truth  is  that  Columbus  discovered  only  some 
far-away  islands  of  the  West  Indies  and  afterwards 
made  his  way  to  a  portion  of  South  America ;  but  he 
went  to  his  grave  believing  the  land  he  had  seen  to  be 
a  part  of  Eastern  Asia.  The  attempt  of  Leo  to  estab- 
lish himself  on  a  specially  friendly  footing  among  us  on 
the  ground  that  the  Spanish  bravoes  of  South  America 
were  Roman  Catholics,  heroes  of  the  faith  and  Apostles 
of  Christian  civilization,  will  strike  the  average  Ameri- 
can Protestant  as  a  rather  heavy  Papal  joke.  Ameri- 
cans are  not  all  that  they  might  be,  but  they  have 
common  schools  in  which  they  learn  a  little  of  the  ele- 
mentary history  of  their  country.  If,  therefore,  Roman- 
ists expect  the  rising  generations  to  accept  the  dogma 
of  infallibility,  they  must  either  induce  the  Pope  to 
place  our  school  histories  on  the  ''  Index  of  books  which 
Catholics  are,  at  the  peril  of  their  souls,  forbidden  to 
read,"  or  to  cease  writing  encyclicals  in  which  reference 
is  made  to  historical  subjects. 

Think  of  it  for  a  moment.  This  independent,  repub- 
lican, Protestant  country,  the  fruit  of  Spanish  enter- 
prise and  the  Roman  Catholic  religion!  Romanists 
will  find  it  hard  to  convince  us  of  this.  Indeed  they 
can  never  do  it,  so  long  as  Mexico,  and  the  Central  and 
South  Americas  are  remembered.  If  there  is  one  les- 
son written  in  bold  and  unmistakable  characters  all 
over  the  face  of  those  countries,  it  is  that  Romanism 
has  not  the  power  to  create  great,  free,  prosperous  and 
intelligent,  or  even  moral  nations.  The  Spanish  and 
Italian  Peninsulas  are  themselves  evidence  of  this.  In 
the  words  of  Motley:  "They  have  had  a  different  his- 
tory from  that  which  records  the  career  of  France, 
Prussia,  the  Dutch  Commonwealth,  the  British  Empire 
and  the  Transatlantic  Republic."     The  cause  of  this 


I 


364 


WHY    AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


difference  is  pointed  out  by  *' Janus"  who  was  certainly 
in  a  position  to  know  whereof  he  spoke.  There  is, 
says  he,  "a  profound  hatred  at  the  bottom  of  the  soul 
of  every  genuine  Ultramontane,  of  free  institutions  and 
the  whole  constitutional  system.''  He  then  proceeds 
to  make  the  truth  of  this  statement  manifest  by  the 
most  conclusive  and  varied  evidence  drawn  from  the 
history  of  almost  every  European  country. 

We  have  not  in  this  connection  lost  sight  of  the  fact 
that  it  is  claimed,  upon  what  on  the  surface  seems  to  be 
good  ground,  that  the  Romanists  of  Maryland  were  the 
first  to  practice  toleration  in  mattera  of  religion.  Their 
descendants  of  this  generation  make  much  of  the  stat- 
ute which  provides  that  "no  person  whatsoever  within 
this  province  [Maryland]  professing  to  believe  in  Jesus 
Christ,  shall  from  henceforth  be  anyways  troubled  or 
molested  for  his  or  her  religion,  nor  in  the  free  exercise 
thereof,  nor  anyway  compelled  to  the  belief  or  exercise 
of  any  other  religion  against  his  or  her  consent.''  This 
with  the  statement  of  the  historian,  Bancroft,  to  the 
effect  that  in  Lord  Baltimore's  colony  "religious liberty 
obtained  a  home,  its  only  home  in  the  wide  world," 
formed  the  text  and  burden  of  the  addresses  at  the 
Roman  Catholic  Conference  at  Baltimore  in  1889,  and 
ever  since  Romanists  have  quoted  them  upon  almost 
every  occasion  of  a  conversation  with  a  Protestant. 

Before  proceeding  to  examine  this  claim  in  the  light 
of  the  facts  in  the  case,  let  it  be  observed  that,  though 
Maryland  may  have  been  the  first  to  secure  religious 
toleration  by  legislation,  she  was  not  the  only  colony 
to  practice  it.  Mr.  Bancroft  whose  complimentary  re- 
marks concerning  them  Romanists  are  naturally  fond 
of  citing,  also  has  something  to  say  about  the  toler- 
ance of  the  Episcopalians  of  Virginia :  "I  find  no  trace 
of  persecution  in  the  earliest  history  of  the  colony." 


THE    CHURCH    OF    OUR    RACE. 


365 


The  following  extract  from  Bishop  Coleman's  History 
of  the  Church  in  America  will  show  that  no  more  can  be 
said  of  Maryland .  ' '  Churchmen  began  very  early  to  set- 
tle in  Maryland,  so  called  in  honor  of  Queen  Henrietta 
Maria,  wife  of  Charles  I.  They  came  from  Virginia, 
some  time  prior  to  1634,  and  made  their  homes  on  the 
Isle  of  Kent,  opposite  what  is  now  known  as  the  city  of 
Annapolis.  The  Rev.  Richard  James,  who  had  accom- 
panied Sir  George  Calvert,  the  first  Lord  Baltimore, 
before  he  became  a  Roman  Catholic,  was  for  a  while 
their  minister.  Not  long  afterwards,  a  Chapel  was 
erected  at  St.  Mary's  where  lay  Services  were  held. 
These  Church  people  suffered  considerable  indignity  at 
the  hands  of  the  Roman  Cathohcs,  against  whom  they 
felt  obliged  to  petition  for  redress.  They  styled  them- 
selves 'Protestant  Catholics.'  One  complaint  was 
that  a  prominent  Roman  Catholic  had  stolen  the  key  of 
their  Chapel  and  removed  their  books.  He  was  made 
to  restore  them,  and  pay  a  fine  of  five  hundred  pounds 
of  tobacco,  to  be  applied  to  the  support  of  the  first 
Clergyman  who  should  arrive.  Before  a  gi-eat  while, 
the  proprietary  government  was  overthrown,  and 
Protestants,  with    religious    toleration,   were  in   the 

ascendency." 

In  regard  to  the  pretension  that  Americans  ow^e 
their  religious  and  civil  liberties  to  Roman  Catholics, 
we  desire  in  the  interest  of  truth  to  make  two  or  three 
observations.  To  begin,  the  statute  of  which  we  hear 
so  much  is  not  quite  so  liberal  as  might  be  supposed 
from  the  extracts  w  hich  Romanists  so  frequently  quote. 
The  part  that  they  always  leave  out  runs  as  follows : 
'*Any  person  or  persons  whatsoever  that  shall  deny 
our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  to  be  the  Son  of  God,  or  shall 
deny  the  Holy  Trinity,  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy 
Ghost,  or  the  Godhead  of  any  of  the  three  persons  of 


IIIt 


i  i\ 


366 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOCLD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


% 


§'  1 


the  Holy  Trinity  or  the  unity  of  the  Godhead,  or  shall 
nse  any  reproachful  words,  speeches  or  lan^ages  con- 
cerning the  Holy  Trinity,  or  any  of  the  three  said  Per- 
sons thereof,  shall  be  punished  with  death  and  confisca- 
tion or  forfeiture  of  all  his  or  her  land  and  goods  to  the 
Lord  Proprietor  and  his  heirs."  And,  in  quoting  from 
Mr.  Bancroft  they  forget  to  mention  what  he  says 
about  the  composition  of  the  legislative  body  which 
passed  the  statute.  He  says:  ''The  Protestant  Gov- 
ernor, Stone,  and  his  Council  of  six,  composed  equally 
of  Protestants  and  Catholics,  and  the  representatives 
of  the  people  of  Maryland,  of  whom  five  were  Catholics, 
at  a  general  session  of  the  Assembly,  held  in  April, 
1649,  placed  upon  their  statute  book  an  act  for  the 
religious  freedom  which  by  the  unbroken  usage  of  fif- 
teen years  had  become  sacred  on  their  soil."  In  an- 
other place  he  tells  us  that  "  the  very  great  majority  of 
the  Maryland  people  were  Protestants." 

Thus  it  looks  very  much  as  if  the  law  were  a  Protes- 
tant act  for  the  toleration  of  Romanists  instead  of  the 
reverse,  as  they  would  have  us  believe.  That  this  is  the 
correct  view  of  the  matter  is  rendered  next  to  certain  by 
the  fact  that  in  a.d.  1048  William  Stone,  the  Governor, 
an  ancestor  of  Bishop  Stone,  of  Maryland,  took  the 
following  oath:  "I  will  not  molest,  trouble  or  dis- 
countenance any  i)erson  in  this  province  professing  to 
believe  in  Jesus  Christ,  in  particular  no  Roman  Catho- 
lic." "What  does  this  signify,"  asks  Bishop  Coleman, 
"  but  that  the  Roman  Catholics  were  the  tolerated  and 
protected?" 

"That  Roman  Catholics,"  says  Dr.  McConnell  in  his 
History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  "should  be 
claimed  as  the  champions  of  religious  liberty  in  the 
seventeenth  century,  seems  suflSciently  grotesque  to  the 
student  of  history.    The  simple  truth  in  the  premises  is 


THE    CHURCH    OF    OUR    RACE. 


367 


this:  The  Calverts  did  believe  and  practice  so;  the 
Roman  Church  did  neither  the  one  nor  the  other.  The 
settlers  of  Maryland  were  too  glad  to  find  safety  to 
think  of  persecution.  Notthatthey  would  have  done  so 
if  they  could.  They  should  have,  ungrudged,  their  meed 
of  praise;  but  they  must  not  have  all  the  praise.  It 
must  not  be  forgotten  that  their  new  home  was  given 
them  by  a  Protestant  king,  with  the  hearty  advice  and 
approval  of  a  Protestant  council,  who  in  so  doing 
waived  their  own  claims  in  the  interest  of  their  mis- 
guided but  still  loved  countrymen.  They  made  the  gift 
with  their  eyes  open.  English  Romanists  were  ut- 
terly discredited  as  citizens.  It  was  not  alone  nor  chiefly 
that  their  religion  was  abhorrent.  By  their  own  dec- 
laration they  took  their  political  orders  from  an 
enemy  whom  England  could  not  then  afford  to  despise. 
Romanists  in  England  meant  servants  to  the  Papacy 
and  agents  of  the  King  of  Spain.  Despite  of  this  Prot- 
testant  Englishmen  gave  them  that  peaceful  home  in 
Maryland,  which  had  already  been  brutally  refused 
them  by  their  French  co-religionists  in  Newfoundland. 
The  founders  were  of  those  few  in  their  day  who  were 
Catholics  rather  than  Romanists,  and  Englishmen  be- 
fore either.  Such  were  the  Calverts,  a  noble  race  with 
few  contemporaries  and  few^er  descendants.  They  had 
neither  the  will  nor  the  power  of  intolerance.  But  they 
laid  no  claim  to  toleration  as  a  virtue.  They  simply 
recognized  existing  facts.  The  first  offer  of  persecution 
by  the  Maryland  colony  would  have  brought  such  a 
storm  about  them  as  would  have  swept  them  into  the 
ocean.  Churchmen  and  Quakers,  Papists  and  Puritans, 
would  have  combined  to  exterminate  the  ingrat^s. 
They  were  glad  to  leave  England,  and  there  is  serious 
reason  to  believe  that  they  were  not  altogether  sorry 
to  be  three  thousand  miles  farther  away  from  Rome." 


368 


WHY    AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


■ 


No,  we  owe  our  liberty  of  conscience,  civilization  and 
marvelous  material  prosperity  to  our  English  origin 
and  Protestant  religion.  This  being  the  case,  it  seems 
to  be  a  clear  indication  of  God's  will  that  we  should  be 
identified  with  the  Church  of  the  English-speaking  race. 
Neither  the  Roman  Church  nor  any  of  the  Denomina- 
tions can  establish  a  claim  to  the  recognition  and  allegi- 
ance of  Americans  upon  the  ground  of  being  the  Church 
of  our  race.  Romanism  and  Sectarianism  were  respec- 
tively six  hundi-ed  and  fifteen  hundred  years  too  late  in 
coming  upon  the  scene.  Whatever  the  Roman  Catholics 
in  England  may  have  to  say  about  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, they  are  unable  to  deny  that  their  own  organiza- 
tion in  that  country  is  a  new  one.  It  has  no  succession 
from  pre-Reformation  times.  But  the  present  Bishops 
of  the  older  Sees  are  historically  and  canonically  the 
successors  of  those  who  occupied  them  before  the  Refor- 
mation back  to  the  earliest  days  of  Christianity.  The 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  was  therefore  right  when 
sometime  ago  he  styled  English  Romanism  the  *'new 
Italian  Mission.''  Romanists  at  first  were  much  ex- 
asperated at  an  expression  which  so  precisely  defined 
their  true  status.  But  one  of  their  own  number,  the 
Jesuit  Father  Humphreys,  has  since  boldly  avowed : 
"  We  are  a  new  Mission  straight  from  Rome."  On  this 
point  at  least,  Anglican  and  Romans  are  now 
agreed.  An  Archimandrite  of  the  Greek  Church,  resid- 
ing in  England,  says :  "  Roman  Catholics,  like  ourselves 
[Greek  Catholics],  are  Nonconformists  in  these  Isles. 
The  Ecclesiastical  State  Church  of  England  we  recognize 
a&  an  important  branch  of  the  great  Catholic  Church." 

Thus,  whether  we  act,  in  the  choice  of  a  Church,  with 
reference  to  God's  will,  or  regard  to  the  future  of  our 
race  and  civilization,  we  shall  choose  the  Episcopal 
Church  rather  than  any  other. 


III. 


A  VALID  MINISTRY, 

WE  should  be  induced  to  identify  ourselves  with 
the  Episcopal  Church  rather  than  with  any 
one  of  the  Protestant  Denominations,  because 
her  ministry  is  more  certainly  authoritatively  commis- 
sioned. All  agree  that  the  validity  of  a  minister's  com- 
mission must  be  considered.  Some  of  the  Denominations 
of  modern  origin  attach  almost,  if  not  quite,  as  much 
importance  to  this  matter  as  do  Episcopalians  and 
other  representatives  of  Historic  Churches.  We  are  at 
unity  in  the  agreement  that  no  man  with  impunity  can 
take  the  great  honor  and  assume  the  awful  responsi- 
bilities of  representing  Christ  as  a  proclaimer  of  the 
Gospel  message  and  an  administrator  of  the  Gospel 
Sacraments,  unless  he  be  divinely  called  thereto.  But 
we  differ  as  to  what  constitutes  this  call  which  we  agree 
to  be  essential.  A  majority  of  our  Denominational 
brethren  think  that  it  consists  exclusively  in  an  inward, 
spiritual  call.  The  minority  among  them  hold  that  to 
thiscall  must  be  added  thelayingon  of  hands  by  Presby- 
ters or  elders.  But  not  even  the  latter  of  these,  though 
inclusive  of  the  former,  is  held  to  be  a  sufficient  com- 
mission by  any  of  the  branches  of  the  Historic  Church 
of  which  the  American  Episcopal  is  one.  Romans, 
Greeks,  Anglicans  and  other  Catholic  and  Apostolic 
Communions,  comprising  together  about  nine-tenths  of 
Christendom,  insist  that  none  are  lawful  ministers  of 
the  Church  of  God  unless  they  have  received  Ordination 
by  a  Bishop  who  can  trace  his  spiritual  descent  and 

C.  A.-24  (369) 


870 


WHY   AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE    E1»ISC01»ALIAKS. 


authority  to  the  Apostles  by  an  unbroken  succession. 
Nor  are  those  who  contend  for  the  sufficiency  of  Presby- 
terian ordination,  able  to  advance  and  support  any  ar- 
gument that  is  convincing  to  us,  or  reassuring  to  those 
among  themselves  who  have  once  become  familiar  with, 
and  disturbed  by,  the  facts  upon  which  our  convictions 
rest. 

Our  Bishops  can  show  their  connection  with  the 
Apostles  by  at  least  three  independent  continuous  an- 
cestral lines,  namely,  that  of  Jerusalem,  Rome  and 
Ephesus.  And  this  they  can  do  by  almost  innumerable 
separate  strands.  Through  St.  Augustine,  first  Bishop 
of  Canterbury,  St.  Patrick,  first  Archbishop  of  Armagh, 
and  the  British,  Irish  and  Galilean  Bishops,  they  are 
connected  with  St.  John  and  St.  Paul ;  through  Arch- 
bishop Theodore  and  several  of  his  successors,  with  St, 
Paul  and  St.  Peter,  and  through  St.  David  and  the 
Welsh  Bishops,  with  St.  James  and  the  whole  college  of 
Apostles.  There  is  not  a  candid  historian  in  all  the 
world  who  will  question  the  continuity  of  the  English 
succession.  Thus,  in  our  Ordinations,  nothing  is  want- 
ing that  either  the  representatives  of  modern  Denomina- 
tion alism  or  of  the  various  branches  of  the  ancient 
Catholic  and  Apostolic  Church  deem  essential. 

In  view  of  the  fact  that  the  whole  of  Christendom 
held  to  the  necessity  of  Episcopal  Ordination  during  all 
of  the  fifteen  hundred  years  preceding  the  Reformation, 
and  that  nine-tenths  of  the  Christian  world  still  hold  it, 
we  could  never  be  quite  certain  about  the  lawfulness  of 
the  Orders  of  our  ministry,  if  their  possession  depended 
wholly  upon  the  inward  call,  or  upon  the  laying  on  of 
hands  by  the  Presbytery,  or  even  upon  both  of  these. 
On  the  other  hand,  if  w^e,  who  are  in  the  great  majority, 
be  wrong,  and  they,  who  are  in  the  small  minority, 
right,  there  will  still  be  no  room  for  misgiving  on  our 


SUPERIOR    OPPORTUNITIES. 


371 


part.  For  if  either  the  inward  call  or  the  laying  on  of 
hands  by  Presbyters,  or  both  of  them  together,  be  neces- 
sary, the  validity  of  the  Ordination  which  our  ministers 
have  received,  cannot  be  doubted.  They  are  obhged  to 
answer  questions  by  responses  which  they  could  not 
make  if  they  were  not  fully  persuaded  of  a  Divine  call  to 
preach  the  everlasting  Gospel.  It  is  moreover  required 
that  at  least  two  Presbyters  shall  be  present  to  lay  on 
hands  with  the  Bishop.  If,  therefore,  a  Church  be 
chosen  with  reference  to  the  validitv  of  its  ministrv, 
there  is  none  which  can  present  a  better  claim  than  the 
Episcopal  Church.  No  ministry  is  more  demonstrably 
Scriptural  and  Apostolic  than  ours. 


IV. 


SUPERIOR  OPPORTUNITIES, 

NEXT  to  finding  in  history  an  external  indication 
of  God's  will  as  to  our  choice  of  a  Church,  we 
should  have  also  in  view  an  environment  con- 
ducive to  our  growth  in  Christ4ikeness,  and  to  the  up- 
building of  ourselves  in  "the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints."  Indeed  to  be  governed  by  these  considerations 
is  only  another  way  of  obeying  Him.  For  certainly  it 
is  His  will  that  we  should  be  rooted  and  grounded  in 
the  true  doctrine  of  Christ  and  the  Apostles,  and  that 
we  should  grow  into  the  full  stature  of  Christian  man- 
hood and  womanhood.  The  main  object  in  life  should 
be  the  shaping  of  our  conduct  and  the  moulding  of  our 
character  by  the  precepts  and  example  of  our  Lord 
and  Saviour.  In  this  great  work  we  require  help  in  the 
way  of  constant,  eflScient  teaching.  In  other  words,  we 
must  be  in  a  good  school  of  Christ.    All  Churches  are, 


'i 


a72 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOULD   BE   EPISG<)PAI«IAHS. 


in  one  of  their  chief  aspects,  religions  seminaries  of 
learning.  And  all  persons  who  attend  upon  Divine 
Services  are  students. 

In  respect  to  institutions  for  secular  education,  it  is 
well  understood  that  there  is  a  wide  difference  between 
them,  so  far  as  equipment  and  efficiency  are  concerned. 
Parents  and  students  recognize  this,  and,  when  their 
circumstances  will  permit,  feel  it  their  privilege  and  duty 
to  select  the  best.  Now  we  hold  that  there  is  just  as 
much  room,  if  not  more,  for  preference  in  rehgious 
schools.  If  in  other  respects  the  popular  assertion: 
"One  Church  is  as  good  as  another,''  be  true,  it  cer- 
tainly is  not  so  concerning  their  teaching  capabilities. 
In  this  particular  some  are  unquestionably  better  than 

others. 

The  efficiency  of  a  school  depends  upon  four  things : 
The  proficiency  of  the  teachers,  the  course  of  study, 
the  text-books  and  the  apparatus  for  illustrating  and 
impressing  the  truths  that  are  taught.  We  believe  that 
even  a  cursory  examination  of  the  educational  system 
which  prevails  throughout  the  Anglican  Communion, 
will  lead  all  candid  Americans,  who  make  choice  of  a 
Church  for  the  purpose  of  learning  in  the  school  of 
Christ,  to  choose  the  Episcopal  Church.    Her  ministers 
or  teachers  will  be  found  to  l>e  well  qualified  for  their 
work.    Her  course  of  study  covers  the  whole  ground. 
Her  text-books  comprise  not  only  the  Holy  Scriptures, 
but  also  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  which  has  no 
equal  for  the  light  which  it  throws  upon  the  Word  of 
God,  and  for  the  practical  way  in  which  it  weaves  its 
teachings  into  our  lives.    Her  ritual,  festivals,  and  fasts 
are  so  many  impressive  object  lessons,  tending  at  once 
to  systematize,  emphasize  and  fix  the  oral  teachings  of 
the  Services  and  sermons.  See  how  the  most  important 
events  of  the  Christian  Dispensation  and  the  doctrines 


SUPERIOR    OPPORTUNITIES. 


373 


which  they  teach  pass  under  review  from  year  to  year 
through  the  whole  of  our  lives. 

"Advent  tells  us  Christ  is  near, 
Christmas  tells  us  Christ  is  here; 
In  Epiphany  we  trace 
All  the  glory  of  His  Grace. 

"Those  three  Sundays  before  Lent 
Will  prepare  us  to  repent, 
That  in  Lent  we  may  begin  . 

Earnestly  to  mourn  for  sin. 

"  Holy  Week  and  Easter  then 
Tell  who  died  and  rose  again, 
O  that  happy  Easter  day, 
Christ  is  risen  again  we  say. 

"Yes,  and  Christ  ascended,  too, 
To  prepare  a  place  for  you. 
So  we  give  Him  special  praise 
After  those  great  forty  days. 

"Then  He  sent  the  Holy  Ghost 
On  the  Day  of  Pentecost, 
With  us  ever  to  abide. 
Well  may  we  keep  Whitsuntide. 

"Last  of  all  we  humbly  sing 
Glory  to  our  God  and  King, 
Glory  to  the  One  in  Three 
On  the  feast  of  Trinity." 

But  the  doctrinal  period  from  Advent  to  Trinity 
covers  only  half  of  the  course  of  sacred  teaching  pro- 
vided for  in  the  Prayer  Book.  After  that  we  have  six 
months  of  practical  instruction.  In  the  words  of  the 
Bishop  of  Ohio :  "  The  Church  gives  us  twenty-five  Sun- 
days of  the  Trinity  season,  in  which  the  holy  teachings 
of  our  Lord  are  set  forth.  The  first  six  months  of  the 
year  are  occupied  with  the  succinct  narrative  of  His 
earthly  experience ;  the  next  six  months  are  filled  with 


WHY   AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


the  result  of  His  holy  instructions.  Each  Sunday  has 
its  theme  and  topic ;  and  these  are  the  fruits,  the  out- 
growth of  His  own  example.  Faith,  forgiveness,  charity, 
hope,  perseverance,  patience,  these  are  some  of  the 
sacred  virtues  illumined  and  set  forth— the  Christian 
works,  the  Christian  development,  the  Christian  walk — 
accentuated  by  the  glowing  words  culled  ft-om  the 
Bible,  and  grouped  in  order,  to  set  forth  the  unmistak- 
able rule  of  the  Christian's  daily  life  and  conversation." 

As  a  distinguished  Congregational  minister.  Dr. 
Thomas  K.  Beecher,  says:  **He,  who  for  years  has 
been  a  Churchman,  and  remains  ill-grounded  in  Scrip- 
ture, shows  himself  to  be  an  unworthy  son  of  a  very 
faithful  Mother.  By  the  Lessons,  Gospels,  Epistles, 
Psalms  and  Collects,  appointed  for  special  fast  or  feast 
days,  the  events  commemorated  by  that  day  are 
wrought  into  the  memory  of  every  worshipper.  And  by 
seasons,  longer  or  shorter,  of  special  religious  effort 
and  observance,  this  Church  satisfies  the  same  want 
which  other  churches  satisfy  by  weeks  of  prayer,  pro- 
tracted meetings  and  long  revivals.  A  good  school  is  a 
dull  place  to  any  visitor  who  rushes  in  to  find  sensation 
and  excitement.  He  will  call  it  dry,  poky,  stupid.  In 
like  manner,  many  religious  sensation-makers  and  sen- 
sation-seekers will  promptly  vote  the  Church  calendar 
and  all  its  smooth  machinery  of  pious  drill,  a  very  dull 
substitute  for  a  regular,  rousing  revival.  But,  in  the 
long  run,  the  Church  that  steadily  trains  and  teaches 
will  outlive  the  church  that  only  arouses  and  startles. 
*  If  ye  continue  in  My  word,  then  are  ye  My  disciples 
indeed.'" 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Hitchcock,  in  a  paper  read  before  the 
last  Pan-Presbyterian  Conference,  thus  speaks  of  the 
value  of  the  Christian  year  and  pleads  for  its  restora- 
tion :    "I  anticipate  a  revival  of  the  old  Christian  year. 


SUPERIOR    OPrOUTUXITIES. 


375 


Clear  back,  close  up  to  the  Apostolic  times,  we  find  at 
least  the  Passover,  Pentecost  and  Epiphany.  Christmas 
appears  not  long  after.  And  then  the  calendar  was 
crowded  with  festivals  which  disgusted  our  Protestant 
fathers,  bringing  the  w  hole  system  into  disrepute.  As 
between  Puritans  and  Papists,  we  side,  of  course,  with 
the  Puritan,  but  the  older  way  is  better  than  either. 
Judaism  had  more  than  its  weekly  Sabbath,  and  Protes- 
tant Christendom  needs  more,  and  is  steadily  taking 
more.  Christmas  is  leading  this  new  procession.  Good 
P>iday,  Easter  and  Whitsuntide  are  not  far  behind. 
These,  at  least,  can  do  us  no  harm.  They  emphasize  the 
three  grand  facts  and  features  of  our  religion :  Incar- 
nation, Atonement,  and  Regeneration." 

By  comparison  with  the  Episcopal  Church,  the  Ro- 
man educational  system  is  unintelligible  and  supersti- 
tious, and  that  of  the  Denominations  is  wanting  in  com- 
prehensiveness and  thoroughness.  Rome  gives  too  much 
time  to  legends  and  traditions,  and  the  Denominations 
lay  too  great  stress  upon  emotions  and  impulses.  The 
former  system  accepts  the  decrees  of  a  Pope ;  the  latter 
follows  the  idiosyncrasies  of  enthusiastic  leaders.  The 
one  tends  to  exaggerated  dependence,  the  other  to  un- 
bounded individualism.  The  one  is  petrifaction,  the 
other  dissipation.  The  end  of  both  must  be  a  departure 
farther  and  farther  from  the  Catholic  Faith.  I  am 
not  claiming  that  the  Anglican  or  Episcopalian  system 
is  faultless,  but  I  insist  that  it  is  incomparably  better 
than  either  the  Roman  or  Denominational.  Besides,  it 
stands  to  reason  that  the  Church  which  is  entwined 
with  the  entire  history  of  our  race,  has  in  herself  those 
conservative  elements  and  constructive  forces  which  are 
just  what  our  national  fabric  requires.  The  Church's 
superiority  as  a  religious  educator  has  all  along  at- 
tracted many  Americans  to  her  fold,  and  will  continue 


\ 


I  'I. 

! 


376 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOULD   BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


to  do  SO  in  increasing  numbers  as  long  as  men  and 
women  choose  their  Church  relationship  with  reference 
to  the  opportunity  afforded  to  them  for  becoming 
rooted  and  grounded  in  the  Faith  of  the  Gospel,  and  for 
gTovving  up  in  the  full  stature  of  Christian  manhood 
and  womanhood. 


Again,  we  claim  that  in  the  choice  of  a  Church,  it  is 
a  duty  to  have  regard  to  opportunities  of  usefulness  to 
your  neighbor  and  to  the  world  at  large.  The  reasons 
which  would  induce  you  to  join  the  Episcopal  Church, 
on  your  own  l)ehalf,  are  of  equal  force  when  you  have  in 
view  the  good  of  others.  For  they,  as  well  as  you,  have 
need  of  building  up  in  faith  and  character.  If  the 
Church's  system  is  best  for  you,  it  will  likewise  be  so 
for  your  family,  for  your  neighbor,  and  for  your  coun- 
trymen generally.  This  will  appear  more  satisfactorily 
if,  after  agreeing  upon  the  principal  religious  needs  of 
our  time  and  country,  it  can  be  shown  that  of  all  the 
Christian  bodies,  the  Episcopal  is  the  best  adapted  to 
meet  them.  There  will  be  little,  if  any,  dissent  from  the 
affirmation  that  one  of  our  greatest  needs  is  such  a 
presentation  of  Christianity  as  will  produce  the  highest 
type  of  character. 

We  have  already  seen  that  the  educational  system 
of  the  Episcopal  Church  is  at  least  theoretically  the 
best.  If  our  theory  be  true,  it  should  be  capable  of 
something  approaching  to  practical  demonstration,  for 
"By  their  fruits  ye  shall  know  them.''  But  how  shall 
we,  without  comparisons  which  will  be  apparently  un- 
charitable, demonstrate  our  theory  by  the  fruit  of  the 
system?  It  will  not  do  for  us  to  be  the  judge,  for  so 
our  decision  would  be  rejected  as  ])artial  and  biased. 
We  must,  therefore,  produce  outside  testimony.   This  is 


SUPERIOR    OPPORTUNITIES. 


377 


found  in  the  most  satisfactory  directions  imaginable. 
Upon  the  whole,  those  who  are  placed  by  the  suffrages 
of  the  people  in  the  most  responsible  and  exalted  public 
offices,  will  be  admitted  to  have  been  the  picked  men  of 
the  country.  This  has  not,  of  course,  always  been  the 
case,  but  the  exceptions,  it  must  be  conceded,  do  not 
disprove  the  general  rule.  If,  then,  we  can  make  it  clear 
that  an  abnormal  proportion  of  the  most  illustrious  of 
our  public  servants  have  been  sons  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  our  claim  that  she  should  be  chosen  because  she 
develops  the  type  of  character  that  the  country  stands 
most  in  need  of,  will  have  been  made  good. 

Now,  it  cannot  altogether  have  escaped  the  atten- 
tion of  any  who  are  in  the  habit  of  reading  the  obitu- 
ary notices  of  distinguished  personages,  that  many 
of  the  public  men  who  have  died  in  the  course  of 
the  last  ten  or  fifteen  years,  have  been  buried  by  our 
Clergy  and  Service.  Of  course,  this  is  no  proof  that  the 
deceased  was  a  communicant  of  the  Episcopal  Church, 
but  it  does  prove  that  he  was  more  or  less  closely  con- 
nected with  her,  or,  at  least,  that  she  was  his  preference. 
I  am  convinced,  however,  from  personal  investigation, 
that  inquiry  would,  in  the  majority  of  cases,  establish 
the  fact  that  he  was  by  birth,  education,  and  life-long 
association,  a  Churchman. 

In  September,  1886, 1  had  occasion  to  make  a  mem- 
orandum of  the  men  who,  in  the  course  of  the  preceding 
twelve  months,  had  been  added  to  the  United  States' 
list  of  honored  dead.  It  was  as  follows :  Thomas  A. 
Hendricks,  Vice  President  of  the  United  States;  George 
B.  McClellan,  General^  and  candidate  for  the  Presidency; 
Wm.  H.  Vanderbilt,  the  richest  man  the  world  had  ever 
known;  W.  S.  Hancock,  General,  and  candidate  for 
the  Presidency;  Horatio  Seymour,  twice  Governor  of 
New  York,  also  candidate  for  the  Presidency;  J.  H. 


378 


WHY    AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


Devereux,  General,  and  Kailway  President ;  David  Davis, 
Associate  Justice  of  the  United  States  Supreme  Court ; 
S.  J.  Tilden,  Governor  of  New  York,  and  candidate  for 
the  Presidency ;  John  W.  Stevenson,  Governor  of  Ken- 
tucky, and  United  States  Senator ;  Rufus  P.  Spaulding, 
Judge  and  Scholar.  Of  these,  Tilden  was  the  only  one 
whose  obsequies  were  not  performed  by  one  of  our  Cler- 
gymen, and  he,  Justice  Davis  and  McClellan  were  the 
only  persons  among  these  ten  distinguished  American 
citizens  who  were  not  found,  upon  investigation,  to 
have  been  actual  communicants  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
This  showing  is  doubtless  proportionately  as  true  of 
the  other  years  back  to  Revolutionary  and  Colonial 
times. 

Bishop  Perry,  the  learned  and  tireless  Historiog- 
rapher of  the  American  Church,  has  thrown  a  great 
deal  of  light  upon  the  Church  relationship  of  the  great 
heroes  and  statesmen,  whose  names  will  ever  be  house- 
hold words  with  Americans,  as,  indeed,  not  a  few  of  them 
are  with  all  lovers  of  liberty,  and  admirers  of  greatness 
throughout  the  civilized  world.  It  appears  from  his 
investigations  that,  notwithstanding  the  prejudice 
against  the  Episcopal  Church,  and  the  false  charges  as 
to  her  patriotism  in  Colonial  times,  which  charges  have 
been  fully  answered  in  another  connection,*  two-thirds 
of  the  First  Continental  Congress  held  at  Philadelphia 
A.D.  1774,  were  Churchmen.  The  same  proportion 
obtained  in  the  Congress  which  declared  our  independ- 
ence. Of  the  fifty-five  actual  signers  of  the  Declara- 
tion of  Independence,  thirty-five  were  Episcopalians; 
twelve,  Congregationalists ;  four,  Presbyterians ;  three, 
Quakers;  one  was  a  Baptist,  and  one  a  Roman 
Catholic.  The  Resolution  offered  in  the  Continental 
Congress  of  a.  d.  1776,  declaring  the  thirteen  colonies 

♦  {jecture  V.,  Part  III. 


SUPERIOR    OPPORTUNITIES. 


379 


free  and  independent,  was  moved  by  Richard  Henry  Lee, 
of  Virginia,  an  Episcopalian  and  a  vestryman.  The 
Chairman  of  the  Committee  of  Congress,  to  which  this 
resolution  was  referred,  and  by  whom  the  declaration 
was  reported  after  its  discussion,  and  adoption  in  "  com- 
mittee of  the  whole,"  was  Benjamin  Harrison,  of  Vir- 
ginia, also  a  vestryman  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  The 
author  of  the  Declaration  itself,  Thomas  Jefferson, 
of  Virginia,  although  in  later  life  regarded  as  a  sceptic, 
and  cei-tainly  holding  and  advocating  views  quite  incon- 
sistent with  those  accepted  by  any  Christian  body,  had 
been  baptized  and  was  a  vestryman  of  the  Church  in 
Virginia,  and  to  the  last  of  his  hfe  was  a  regular  attend- 
ant at  her  Services. 

Of  the  twelve  generals  appointed  by  Washington 
early  in  the  war,  eight  were  his  fellow  Episcopalians.  It 
is  not  too  much  to  claim,  indeed  it  was  admitted  by 
the  Puritan,  Adams,  that  the  issue  of  the  struggle  for 
Independence,  and  the  history  of  this  country,  would 
in  all  probability  have  been  very  different  but  for  these 
illustrious  Episcopalian  patriots.  The  sons  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  were  no  less  conspicuous  and  important  in 
the  preservation  of  the  Union  when  threatened  by  the 
Confederacy.  Seward,  Chase,  Stanton,  Wells,  Blair, 
Dennison,  Henry  Winter  Davis,  Scott,  Meade,  Scofield, 
Curtis,  Hancock,  Farragut,  Porter,  Waite,  Columbus  De- 
lano, and  many  others  of  scarcely  less  distinction,  were 
Episcopalians.  Nor  will  it  at  all  weaken  our  argument, 
so  far  as  it  concerns  the  superiority  of  the  Church's  edu- 
cational system,  if  we  call  attention  to  the  fact  that  the 
leaders  of  the  Confederacy  were  also  Episcopalians. 
This  is  true  of  Davis,  I^ee,  Toombs,  Hill,  Johnston, 
Bishop  Polk,  Longstreet,  Stuart  and  Wade  Hampton. 
True,  these  were  not  patriots  from  the  standpoint 
of  Northerners,  but    Southerners  regarded   them   as 


lit 


I 


380 


WHY    AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


such ;  and  OTdbtibtedly  they  would  have  taken  first 
rank  with  our  heroes  had  their  environment  been  the 

same. 

The  late  Bishop  Robertson,  of  Missouri,  a  high  au- 
thority  on   American   history,  in   his    "Churchman's 
Answer,"  says  that  those,  who  in  this  country  have  borne 
rule  and  been  representative  men,  have  with  a  curious 
unanimity  come  forth  from  those  whose  piety  found  its 
best  expression  in  the  Prayer  Book .    Of  the  Continental 
Congress  from  Peyton  Randolph,  the  majority  of  its 
Presidents  were  Episcopalians.    Washington,  and  two- 
thirds  of  the  Presidents  of  the  United  States  since  his 
day,  have  been  Episcopahans.    The  same  has  been  true 
of  three-fourths  of  all  the  Secretaries  of  State.    The 
most  eminent  and  influential  of  all  our  Statesmen  have 
been  the  same:  Franklin,  Clinton,  Jay,  Morris,  Living- 
stone, Patrick  Henry,  Hoffman,  Schuyler,  Randolph, 
Duane,  Wirt,  Cass,    Clay,  Benton,  Webster.     To  say 
that  the  same  is  true  of  the  commanders  of  our  army 
and  navy,  w  ould  be  to  catalogue  the  names  of  almost 
every  one  who  has  attained  to  eminence.    The  Chief 
Justices  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States 
have,  with  but  two  exceptions,  been  Episcopahans. 

Now,  this  is  a  very  remarkable  showing,  especially 
so  when  we  consider  that  the  Episcopal  Church 
ranks  only  seventh  or  eighth  in  point  of  numbers 
among  the  religious  bodies  of  the  country,  and  that 
both  Romanists  and  Denominationalists,  who  together 
must  represent  nine-tenths  of  our  Christian  population, 
have  always  been  deeply  prejudiced  against  us.  There 
is,  under  the  circumstances,  only  one  satisfactory  w  ay 
of  accounting  for  this,  namely,  by  admitting  the  truth 
of  our  claim,  that  the  Episcopal  Church,  having  the  best 
system  of  religious  education,  is  the  best  adapted  to 
produce  that  type  of  character  of  which  the  country 


DOCTRINAL    STABILITY. 


381 


stands  most  in  need.  Therefore,  if  a  Church  be  chosen 
with  reference  to  the  opportunities  which  it  affords  to 
promote  the  good  of  others  and  of  the  country,  it  will 
necessarily  be  the  Episcopal. 


V. 


DOCTRINAL  STABILITY. 

THE  English  Church,  having  freed  herself  from  the 
Mediaeval  errors,  which  were  common  to  the 
whole  of  Western  Christendom,  occupies  now 
the  same  doctrinal  position  that  she  did  during  the 
first  centuries  of  the  Christian  era.  Since  the  Reforma- 
tion she  has  remained  immovably  anchored  by  her  in- 
comparable Liturgy,  to  the  Faith  once  delivered  to  the 
Saints.  This  is  not  the  case  with  Romanism  or  with 
any  of  the  forms  of  Denominationalism. 

Rome  has  been  adding  to  the  Faith,  the  articles  of 
the  Immaculate  Conception  of  the  Virgin  Mary  and  the 
infallibility  of  the  Pope,  to  say  nothing  of  the  numerous 
decrees  of  the  Council  of  Trent,  the  acceptance  of  which 
is  made  necessary  to  salvation  and  to  membership  in 
her  communion. 

No  additions  have  been  made  to  the  faith  originally 
held  by  Denominationahsts,  but  it  has  been  woefully 
diminished.  With  the  possible  exception  of  the  high 
German  Lutherans,  between  whom  and  Episcopalians 
there  is,  aside  from  their  Presbyterian  government  and 
doctrine  of  Consubstantiation,  so  much  in  common, 
all  the  chief  Denominations  have  drifted  far  away  from 
their  original  moorings.  It  is  impossible  for  any;  but 
the  historian,  to  realize  the  extent  to  w^hich  Denomina- 
tionalists have  been  driven  about  by  every  wind  of  doc- 
trine, and  how  many  of  them  have  made  shipwreck  of 


I 


382 


WHY    AMERICANS   SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


faith  on  the  shoals  of  heresy,  skepticism  and  indifference. 
But  those  who  have  not  the  leisure  or  books  to 
familiarize  themselves  with  the  melancholy  history  of 
non-Episcopal  Protestantism  in  Germany,  France, 
England,  Holland,  the  United  States,  and  indeed  all 
countries  without  any  exception,  where  it  has  taken 
root,  will  perceive  the  truth  of  what  we  have  said  as 
soon  as  their  attention  is  called  to  the  fact,  that  all  the 
divisions  which  have  occurred  since  the  Lutherans 
went  out  from  the  Koman  Church,  and  the  Independents 
from  the  Church  of  England,  mark  more  or  less  wide 
departures  from  the  doctrine  and  discipline  of  the  first 
Dissenters.  In  the  nature  of  things  there  would  have 
been  no  division  without  a  difference,  and  no  difference 
resulting  in  a  division  without  a  departure  from  the 
tenets  of  the  earliest  sectaries.  From  the  standpoint 
of  the  first  sects,  those  who  went  out  must  have  been  in 
each  case  heretics.  Schism  and  heresy  are  inseparable. 
Church  history  proves  that  the  two  invariably  go  hand 
in  hand.  There  may  be  error  in  doctrine  without 
separation,  but  not  the  latter  without  the  former.  This 
being  so,  the  reader  will  see  at  once  that  all  the  hun- 
dreds of  Denominations  into  which  the  first  two  or 
three  nop-Episcopal  bodies  have  been  multiplied,  could 
not  have  arisen  without  wide  divergences  from  the  doc- 
trinal position  of  their  sectarian  forefathers. 

Nor  is  there  any  reason  for  believing  that  the  end  is 
yet.  True  the  multiplication  of  sects  is  no  longer  en- 
couraged and  justified  as  it  was  until  lately.  On  the 
contrary,  many  of  the  choicest  Christians  of  every  name 
are  praying,  working  and  hoping  for  reunion.  But 
nevertheless  we  now  and  then  read  of  the  organization 
of  a  new  Denomination.  And,  it  must  be  remembered 
that  in  reality  all  who  are  not  identified  with  any  form 
of  organized  Christianity,  because  they  think  that  they 


DOCTRINAL    STABILITY. 


383 


can  be  as  good  Christians  outside  the  Church  as  in  it, 
are  a  church  unto  themselves.  There  can  be  no  doubt 
about  it,  these  one-man  churches  are  increasing  at  an 
astounding  rate.  At  the  Keformation  period  every 
man,  woman  and  child  in  Christendom  was  identified 
with  some  body  of  Christians,  but  now  untold  millions 
are  unattached.  So  numerous  are  the  outsiders,  espe- 
cially in  the  United  States,  that  if  a  man  be  asked  con- 
cerning his  religious  affiliations,  no  one  is  surprised  if 
he  reply,  "0  1  belong  to  the  big  church,"  from  which 
we  are  to  understand  that  he  is  one  of  the  unaffiliated 
majority.  And  this  church  so  called  certainly  has  a 
larger  constituency  and  is  growing  more  rapidly  than 
any  other.  Now  the  point  I  make  is  this— and  certainly 
there  are  none  so  obtuse  as  not  to  be  able  to  see 
it— that  every  man  or  woman  having  no  Ecclesiastical 
relationship,  whose  sympathies  are  with  Protestantism, 
is  a  witness  to  the  departures,  and  very  wide  ones  at 
that,  from  the  position  occupied  by  the  first  Denomi- 
nationalists. 

The  most  cursory  examination  of  the  writings  of 
Luther,  Calvin,  and  John  Wesley  will  convince  any  can- 
did mind  that  even  those  who  now  profess  to  be  their 
followers  are  not  so  at  all.  The  evidence  of  this  is  found 
in  the  fact  that  these  illustrious  Reformers  held  and 
taught  many  of  the  very  doctrines  which  are  now  said 
to  bar  their  professed  spiritual  descendants  from  the 
Episcopal  Church.  They  believed  Episcopacy  to  be  of 
Divine  appointment,  or,  at  least,  the  best  form  of  Eccle- 
siastical government ;  they  held  the  doctrine  of  Baptis- 
mal Begeneration ;  they  regarded  Confirmation  as  a 
Scriptural  ordinance;  and  maintained  that  the  Body 
and  Blood  of  Christ  are  spiritually,  though  reallj^  re- 
ceived in  the  Holy  Communion.  It  was  upon  the  urgent 
recommendation  of  Peter  Martyr  and  Bucer,  disciples 


384 


WHY    AMERICANS   SHOULD    BB    EPISCOPALIANS. 


of  Luther  and  Calvin,  that  the  Confession  and  Absolu- 
tion were  introduced  into  our  Daily  Morning  and  Even- 

ing  Prayer.  . 

And   not   only  have  Denominationalists    departed 
from  their  founders  in  respect  to  those  points  which 
wwe  originally  held  in  common  with  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, but  they  have,  in  many  cases,  renounced  the  doc- 
trines which  differentiated  them  from  the  Church.  Take, 
for  example,  the  distinctive  dogmas  of  Calvin.    It  is  un- 
questionable that  during  the  la^t  fifty  years,  Calvinistic 
theology  has  been  generally  surrendered  by  the  Bap- 
tists, CongTegationalists,  and  even  Presbyterians.    And 
yet  so  thoroughly  was  Congregationalism  once  identi- 
fied with  Calvinism,  that  in  England,  the  Independent 
Chapel  is  still  sometimes  called,  in  common  parlance,  the 
'*  Calvinistic  meeting."  If  my  memory  serves  me  correctly, 
it  was  at  Chicago,  on  the  floor  of  the  Great  Annual  Pres- 
byterian Assembly  that  a  delegate,  in  speaking  upon  a 
resolution  providing  for  some  change  in  the  Confession  of 
Faith,  electrified  the  vast  assemblage  by  asserting  that 
there  was  not  in  all  the  Assembly  a  single  minister  who 
believed  in  infant  damnation.    I  believe  the  speaker  was 
not  contradicted.    Be   it  remembered,  it  was  Calvin- 
ism  which  "divided  the  English  Church,  and,  indeed, 
Protestant   Christendom,   into    two    hostile  camps." 
This  system  is  now  universally  given  up.    After  work- 
ing endless  mischief  and  estrangement,  it  has  quietly 
disappeared   from   the   Evangelical  Creed.     And   this 
is  to  a  great  degree  true  of   the  distinguishing  doc- 
trines of  Luther  and  Wesley,  and,  in  fact,  of  all  who 
have  originated  divisions  in  the  Body  of  Christ.    So 
that,  strange  as  it  may  appear,  those  who  call  them- 
selves by  the  names  of  sectaries,  are  not  their  followers, 
either  in  the  many  doctrines  which  they  held  in  com- 
mon with  the  Church,  or  in  a  few  wherein  they  diflered 


DOCTRINAL    STABILITY. 


385 


from  her.  The  old  Faith  is  still  believed  by  countless 
millions,  but  the  new  doctrines  which  were  thought  to 
be  of  so  great  importance  as  to  justify  promulgation  at 
the  expense  of  Christian  unity,  have,  for  the  most  part, 
been  repudiated,  or  at  least  neglected,  even  by  the  de- 
scendants of  those  who  separated  from  the  Historic 
Church,  and  banded  themselves  about  their  leader 
in  order  that  they  might  disseminate  his  peculiar 
views. 

Now  I  respectfully  submit  to  the  Denominational 
reader  that  these  and  other  changes  of  front  constitute  a 
sufficient  reason  for  an  examination,  if  not  an  abandon- 
ment, of  your  present  position.  The  fact  that  you  are 
not  in  accord  with  the  doctrinal  eccentricities  of  your 
fathers,  while  they  were  at  unity  with  us  touching  the 
doctrines  and  customs  to  which  you  object  in  the 
Mother  Church,  should  at  least  induce  you  to  listen 
patiently  to  any  explanation  that  we  have  to  offer. 
"A  part  of  the  old  Denominational  platform  has  already 
given  way  under  your  feet ;  may  it  not  well  be  suspected 
that  the  rest  is  rickety  and  untenable?  May  it  not  be  that 
objections  still  entertained— as,  for  example,  to  Apostol- 
ical succession,  to  Baptismal  Regeneration,  to  Absolu- 
tion, and  the  like,  may  turn  out  to  be  based  on  misunder- 
standing and  to  be  propped  up  by  prejudice?  You  will 
no  doubt  protest  that  this  is  impossible,  but  then  your 
forefathers  would  have  protested  just  as  loudly  that 
they  could  never  be  reconciled  to  the  surplice,  never 
abandon  the  'Five  Points,'  never  tolerate  Liturgical 
forms.  To  Churchmen  patiently  looking  on  and  pray- 
ing that  Christians  may  be  one,  it  seems  that  /Mr. 
Prejudice  has  fallen  down  and  broken  his  leg,'  and 
they  may  not  only  wish  with  Bunyan  '  that  it  had  been 
his  head,'  but  may  see  in  his  unsteadiness  ground  for 
hoping  that  that  will  come  next. " 

C.  A.— 25 


WHY   AMWIICAKS  SH<WIJ)   B»  EPISCOPALIANS. 

The  Episcopal  Chnrcfi  is  doctrinally  the  most  con- 
servative of  all  bodies  of  Christians.  The  fact  that  she 
is  known  and  spoken  of  as  the  via.  media,  the  '*  middle 
way"  between  the  extremes  of  Romanism  and  Prot^es- 
tanti8m,in  itself  proves  this.  Whoever,  therefore,  in  the 
choice  of  his  Church  relationship  has  reference  to  un- 
ehan^eableness  of  teaching,  will  identify  himself  with 
some  branch  of  the  Anghcan  Communion. 

VL 

CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 

«  For  hearts  that  have  been  long  estranged, 
And  friends  that  have  grown  cold, 
Shall  meet  again,  like  parted  streams. 
And  mingle  as  of  old  ?  " 

AS  a  convert  to  Episcopacy,  I  have  always  thought 
that  one  of  the  chief  reasons  for  membership  in 
the  Anghcan  Communion  rather  than  in  any 
other  is  the  fact  that  she  occupies  the  only  gi-ound  upon 
which  the  greatest  need  of  the  Christian  world.  Unity, 

can  be  satisfied.  ^.  ..    ,       , 

Of  late  years  the  subject  of  Christian  Unity  has  been 
receiving  more  and  more  attention,  until  now  it  may  be 
said  to  have  become  the  ^^burning  question  "  of  theday. 
Professor  Fisher,  of  Yale  College,  a  Congregational  di- 
vine  clearly  discerns  the  rising  spirit  of  Church  Unity, 
when  he  says :  *'  The  centrifugal  age  of  Protestantism  is 
closed.   The  centripetal  action  has  begun."  The  change 
of  thought  in  favor  of  a  united,   rather  than  a  di- 
vided Church  cannot  have  escaped  observation  by  any 
except   a  few  Ecclesiastical  Rip  Van  Winkles.     They 
will  wake  up  some  of  these  fine  days  to  the  reahza- 
tion   of  the  fact  that  the   old   leaders   of  thought, 
and  the  whole  of  the  rising  generation  are  regretting 


CHRISTIAN   UNITY. 


387 


and  deprecating  the  evils  of  divisions  and  are  talking, 
working  and  praying  for  unity,  and  that  they  are  stand- 
ing alone  as  the  champions  of  sectarianism. 

Christian  Unity  is  a  thought  which  has  been  in  the 
hearts  of  many  of  the  religious  movements  of  the  Nine- 
teenth Century.  The  Irvingite  movement,  the  Tracta- 
rian  and  that  which  has  developed  into  the  Denomina- 
tion of  Plymouth  Brethren,  were  all  largely  influenced 
by  it.  The  Evangelical  Alliance,  the  Association  for 
promoting  the  Unity  of  Christendom,  the  Bonn  Reunion 
Conferences,  and  the  Home  Reunion  Society,  are  all  of 
them  fruits  of  the  desire  for  unity  taking  diflerent  forms. 
The  longing  for  reunion  is  now  more  than  ever  finding 
expression  in  publications,  in  the  organization  of  socie- 
ties, in  the  official  declarations  of  Churches  and  in  the 
institution  of  a  day  of  intercession  and  instruction 
which  gives  promise  of  general  observance.  By  com- 
mon consent  the  day  fixed  upon  is  Whitsun-Day.  It 
was  first  appointed  in  the  year  1894,  by  the  Archbishop 
of  Canterbury.  In  A.  D.  1895,  the  League  of  Catholic 
Unity,  a  society  composed  of  very  distinguished  min- 
isters representing  several  of  the  leading  American 
Denominations,  joined  the  Primate  of  the  Anglican 
Communion  in  the  request  that  on  this  day,  annually, 
prayers  be  offered,  and  sermons  preached,  on  behalf  of 
organic  Christian  Union. 

The  reasons  for  fixing  upon  Whitsun-Day  are  obvi- 
ous. It  is  the  birthday  of  the  One,  Holy,  Cathohc  and 
Apostolic  Church  of  Christ.  It  was  on  Pentecost,  fifty 
days  after  Easter,  and  ten  after  the  Ascension,  w^hen  the 
Disciples  were  all  with  one  accord  in  one  place,  that  they 
were  baptized  with  the  Holy  Ghost,  and  endued  with 
that  miraculous  wisdom  and  power  which  enabled  them 
to  carry  out  their  Lord's  plans  and  directions,  by  estab- 
lishing and  building  up  His  Kingdom,  in  spite  of  every 


I 


L)  , 


Iffl 


I 


388 


WHY   AMEKICAKS   SHO0LD   BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


opposition,  with  marvelous  rapidity.  And  after  eight 
hundred  years  of  division  between  the  Eastern  and 
Western  Catholic  Churches  and  three  hundred  years  of 
Denominationalism  in  the  West,  it  has  come  to  be  real- 
ized by  Christians  of  every  name  that  the  world  can 
never  he  brought  to  Christ  by  a  divided  Church.  "  The 
world,"  says  Dr.  Milligan,  a  Presbyt*^rian,  "will  never 
be  converted  by  a  disunited  Church."  **  In  our  present 
divided  state,"  writes  a  veteran  missionary,  Dr.  Alex- 
ander Williamson,  himself  not  a  Churchman,  "we  will 
never  Christianize  China— never ! "  "When  I  asked," 
says  Bishop  Selwyn, "  one  of  the  most  remarkable  of  the 
New  Zealand  chieftains  why  he  refused  to  be  a  Christian, 
he  stretched  out  three  fingers,  and,  pointing  to  the 
center  joint,  said,  'I  have  come  to  a  point  from  which  I 
see  three  roads  branching.  This  is  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, this  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  this  the  Wesleyans. 
I  am  sitting  down  here  doubting  which  to  take.'" 
"And,"  adds  the  Bishop,  "he  sat  doubting  at  that 
*  cross  road '  until  he  died."  The  realization  of  our  im- 
potency  is  pressing  upon  the  hearts  and  consciences  of 
multitudes  of  every  name  the  question,  how  can  unity  be 
restored  ?  It  is  my  purpose  to  answer  this  inquiry  in 
part  by  trying  to  make  it  appear  that  the  only' practi- 
cable rallying  point  is  on  the  ground  occupied  by  the 
American  Episcopal  Church. 


At  the  consecration  of  Dr.  Lawrence,  Bishop  of 
Massachusetts,  the  celebrated  Greek  Archbishop  of  the 
Apostolic  See  of  Zante,  said  truly  of  us:  "You  are  Prot- 
estant, but  you  are  Catholic.  As  Protestants,  you  com- 
prehend all  the  other  Protestant  bodies,  and,  on  the 
other  hand,  you  alone  can  draw  the  attention  of  the 
Catholic  Churches.     Your  Church,  sister  of  the  other 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


389 


Protestant  Churches,  and  sister  of  the  other  Catholic 
Churches,  is  the  center  to  which  all  the  eminent  pastors 
of  Christians  will,  in  the  future,  cast  their  eyes,  when,  by 
the  grace  of  God,  they  shall  decide  to  take  steps  for  the 
union  of  the  Christian  world  into  one  Church  with  one 
Pastor."  The  Archbishop  is  not  alone  in  his  opinion. 
Count  Joseph  De  Maistre,  a  distinguished  Koman  Cath- 
olic, thought  that  if  ever  Christendom  is  to  be  reunited, 
the  movement  must  proceed  from  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion. He  recognized  it  as  the  only  mediator  who 
can  lay  hands  upon  both  parties;  for,  as  he  says,  "with 
one  hand  she  touches  us  [Roman  Catholics]  and  with  the 
other  the  Protestants." 

It  will  be  perfectly  manifest  to  all  who  are  familiar 
with  the  Declaration  of  the  House  of  Bishops  at  Chicago, 
in  A.D.  1886,  and  of  the  Pan-Anglican  Conference  of 
Bishops  at  Lambeth  Palace,  London,  in  the  year  1888, 
and  of  the  action  of  the  General  Convention  at  Balti- 
more, in  A.D.  1892,  that  any  scheme  of  Christian  unity 
which  cannot  be  consummated  within  the  Hmits  of  the 
ground  now  occupied  by  the  American  Episcopal  Church, 
must  fail  so  far  as  includingthe  great  Anglican  Commun- 
ion of  more  than  twenty  million  adherents  is  concerned. 

As  actual  proof  that  it  is  possible  for  Christians  of 
every  name  to  unite  here  in  one  organic  body,  let  me 
call  attention  to  the  notable  fact  that  representatives 
of  all  doctrinal  and  governmental  views  are  now,  and 
long  have  been,  standing  upon  this  ground.  We  have 
in  this  Church  some  who  are,  in  respect  to  their  views  of 
God's  mercy,  Arminians,  Calvinists,  and  Universahsts. 
The  Roman,  Zwinglian,  and  Lutheran  doctrines  of  the 
Sacraments  have  their  advocates,  or  at  least  would  be 
tolerated  among  us.  The  same  is  true  of  the  distinct- 
ive doctrines  of  the  Baptists,  Methodists,  Adventists, 
Disciples,  and  others.  Concerning  the  vexed  question  of 


mo 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOUM>   BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


Church  govertitnent,  we  have  H%h  Episcopalians,  Pres- 
byterians, Congregationalists,  and  Indifferentists.  There 
is  a  sprinkling  of  those  who  advocate  and  practice  an 
extreme  Ritualism,  such  as  could  scarcely  be  duplicated 
in  Koman  usage,  and  others  who,  in  spirit,  and  so  far  as 
possible  in  practice,  are  severe  Puritans.  There  are  sub- 
jectivists  and  externalists ;  literalists  and  rationalists ; 
the  votaries  of  society  and  the  recluse — all  these  schools 
of  doctrine,  government,  worship  and  conduct  are  now 
actually  to  be  found  among  both  the  Clergy  and  Laymen 
of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church. 

The  comprehensive  character  of  the  Church  is  illus- 
trated by  almost  all  our  Confirmation  classes.  A 
majority  of  the  adult  candidates  are  usually  pei-sons 
who  have  grown  up  under  other  religious  influences.  I 
have  before  me  the  account  of  a  class  of  one  hundred 
and  two  candidates  confirmed  on  Good  Friday,  a.d. 
1894,  in  St.  Andrew's  Church,  Harlem,  New  York.  There 
were  fifty-seven  Americans,  twenty-one  Germans,  nine 
Swedes,  seven  Irish  and  eight  English.  The  class  was 
composed  of  twenty  men,  twenty-eight  women,  twenty- 
$ix  girls,  and  twenty-eight  boys.  Among  these,  seven 
were  married  couples.  Ten  men  and  eighteen  women 
represented  the  heads  of  families.  They  were  from  the 
following  Christian  bodies:  the  Church,  52;  Roman 
Catholic,  4;  Universalist,  1 ;  Lutheran,  9;  Methodist, 
14;  Baptist,  5;  Hebrew,  2;  Quaker,  1;  Dutch  Re- 
formed, 5;  Presbyterian,  6;  Congregational,  3. 

The  idea  for  which  many  of  the  Denominations  stand, 
finds  recognition  in  the  Episcopal  Church.  The  Presby- 
terian will  find,  upon  investigation,  that  the  authority 
of  the  Presbytery  is  duly  recognized  in  the  government 
of  the  Church  and  the  Ordination  of  elders ;  the  Congre- 
gationalist,  that  our  parishes  are  sufficiently  independ- 
ent of  each  other,  and  that  the  Laity  have  enough  to 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


391 


say  concerning  Ecclesiastical  affairs ;  the  Lutheran,  that 
the  necessity  of  faith  is  taught;  the  Methodist,  that 
the  Church  in  which  John  Wesley  lived  and  died,  lays  a 
great  deal  of  stress  upon  conversion  and  sanctification ; 
the  Baptist,  that  he  can  immerse  without  let  or  hin- 
drance, and  that  though  Baptism  is  commenced  in  un- 
conscious infancy,  it  is  not  completed  until  Confirma- 
tion is  received  upon  an  intelligent  confession  of  faith; 
the  Romanist,  that  the  necessity  of  unity  and  Catholic- 
ity is  emphasized ;  and  so  on  through  the  whole  list. 

It  appears,  then,  that  almost  any  person,  no  matter 
what  his  peculiarity  of  belief,  can  find  room  enough  in 
this  Church,  providing  only  that  he  sincerely  accepts 
the  cardinal  doctrines  of  the  Catholic  Creeds,  grammat- 
ically and  historically  interpreted,  and  will  tolerate  the 
eccentricities  and  whims  of  others,  who,  like  himself,  be- 
lieve that  the  salvation  of  the  world  depends  upon  some 
little  pet  idea.  If  a  man  can  make  up  his  mind  to  live 
and  let  live,  he  can  ride  into  the  Episcopal  Church  on 
almost  any  hobby,  and  remain  mounted  without  fear  of 
molestation  during  the  remainder  of  life.  Hobbyists 
are  never  excluded  from  a  truly  comprehensive  and  Cath- 
olic Church  such  as  ours.  They  often  exclude  themselves 
because  they  are  too  narrow,  intolerant  and  self-willed 
to  remain  where  others,  as  well  as  they,  have  liberty. 

But,  notwithstanding  all  the  apparently  irreconcil- 
able and  conflicting  elements  to  be  found  in  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  there  is  as  much  harmony  and  brotherly 
love  among  us  as  in  any  one  of  all  the  bodies  of  Chris- 
tians. The  Rev.  Dr.  Shields,  the  Princeton  Professor, 
whose  writings  upon  the  subject  of  Church  Unity  have 
p,ttracted  so  much  attention,  bears  generous  testimony 
to  the  truth  of  this.  He  says:  *' Differences  w^hich 
have  elsewhere  issued  in  sectarianism,  are  somehow  re- 
strained like  balanced  forces,  or  blended  like  discordant 


I 


392 


WHY   AMERICANS    SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


i 


harmony.  Episcopalians,  Presbyterians,  and  Congre- 
gationalists,  in  their  relation  as  Denoininationahsts, 
are  in  a  chronic  state  of  antagonism  and  irritation ; 
but  the  very  same  Christians  or  others  like  them,  in 
their  relations  as  Churchmen,  holding  to  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  simply  lose  all  their  sectarian  rancor  with- 
out losing  their  distinctive  beliefs.  Denominational 
variety  is  thus  visibly  made  consistent  with  Church 
Unity." 

This  remarkable  unity,  in  spite  of  the  widest  divers- 
ity, is  accounted  for  by  the  fact,  that  we  agree  in  rec- 
ognizing the  inherited  Apostles'  and  Nicene  Creeds  as 
containing  the  essentials  of  doctrine,  from  which  there 
can  be  no  departure,  and  in  allowing  almost  unbounded 
liberty  of  opinion,  respecting  all  matters,  that  are  not 
touched  upon  in  these  summaries  of  the  ''Faith  once 
delivered  to  the  Saints."  It  is  also  largely  due,  as 
Professor  Shields  points  out,  to  the  fact  that  we  have 
the  Historic  Episcopate  as  a  center  of  unity.  **It  is 
not,"  says  he,  "a  matter  of  speculation.  We  have  be- 
fore us  all  the  while,  the  object  lesson  of  a  unifying 
Episcopate." 

There  is,  therefore,  nothing  which  partakes  of  the 
character  of  mere  enthusiasm  and  experiment,  much 
less  of  bigotry,  in  our  proposition  that  all  Christians 
should  unite  upon  the  ground  now  occupied  by  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  For,  so  far  as  this 
Church  is  concerned,  unity  is  impossible  upon  any  other 
ground,  and,  as  for  almost  all  other  Christian  bodies,  it 
is  possible  here. 


But  in  showing  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is  des- 
tined to  become  the  all-embracing  form  of  organized 
Christianity  in  the  United  States,  we  may  call  attention 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


393 


to  the  significant  fact  that  she  is  already  dominant  in 
our  largest  city,  and  is  rapidly  becoming  so  in  all  great 
centers  of  population.  In  New  York,  the  increase  of 
population  in  five  years  has  been  15.38  per  cent.  The 
increase  of  Church  membership,  all  Churches  except  the 
Episcopal,  has  been  only  3.12  per  cent.,  while  including 
the  Episcopal,  it  has  been  13.03  per  cent.  But  the 
increase  of  the  Episcopal  alone  was  31.74  per  cent., 
double  that  of  the  population,  and  nearly  treble  that  of 
all  the  Protestant  Denominations  put  together. 

There  can  be  no  question  that  in  the  leading  city  of 
the  country,  the  Church  is  the  most  powerful  of  the  re- 
ligious forces.  Leaving  out  of  the  list  the  Christian 
bodies  which  represent  current  foreign  immigration,  and 
her  proportionate  lead  is  even  greater  than  it  appears 
from  the  following  full  list  of  houses  of  worship  which 
the  various  Denominations  had  respectively  in  the  years 
1871  and  1894: 


Episcopalian 

Presbyterian.. . . 

Methodist 

Roman  CathoHc 

Baptist 

Jewish 

Reformed  Dutch 

Lutheran 

Congregational . 
Universalist .... 

Unitarian 

Friends .  / 

Miscellaneous.. . 

Totals.. 


numbbr  of 

Churches 

IN  1871. 


74 

51 

60 

40 

30 

25 

20 

15 

5 

5 

4 

3 

18 


340 


Number  op 

Churches 

IN  1894. 


103 

70 

65 

84 

50 

46 

27 

21 

7 

3 

3 

2 

41 


522 


Now  it  will  be  admitted  by  the  observing  and  reflect- 
ing that  our  great  cities  exercise  a  moulding  influence 


'  I 


>i 


894 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


over  the  inhabitants  of  illiall^r  towns,  villa^s  and  the 
country.  If,  therefore,  the  Protestant  Episcopal  type  of 
religion  prevails  at  the  close  of  the  nineteenth  century 
in  New  York,  it  is  probable  that  by  the  close  of  the  twen- 
tieth century  it  will  do  so  in  all  the  other  greater  cities 
—it  does  so  now  in  Philadelphia— and  that  it  will  be  the 
dominant  religion  of  the  country  in  the  course  of  time. 

The  history  of  the  spread  of  Christianity  plainly 
teaches  that  no  body  of  Christians  which   is  losing 
ground  or  falling  behind  in  our  great  cities,  however 
prosperous  it  may  be  in  smaller  centers  of  population 
and  in  the  country,  can  possibly  become  the  Church  of 
the  Keconcilation    to    American    Christians.    In    the 
Roman  Empire  the  inhabitants  of  the  smaller  towns, 
villages  and  country  were  the  last  to  give  up  their 
heathen  religion  and  to  embrace  Christianity.     Long 
after  the  Christian   religion   had    been   dominant  in 
Rome,  Alexandria,  Ephesus,  Antioch   and  Constanti- 
nople, the  ''  pagans"  or,  to  translate  the  word,  the  *' in- 
habitants of  the  country,"  continued   in  heathenism. 
But  in  time  Christianity  became  the  religion  of  the 
whole  Empire.    Hence  we  argue  that,  as  the  Protestant 
Episcopal  type  of  religion  is   now   dominant  in   our 
greater  cities,  when  sufficient  time  has  elapsed  for  his- 
tory to  repeat  itself,  this  type  will  also  prevail  through- 
out the  United  States. 


Again,  a  strong  argument  in  support  of  the  claim 
that  our  Savior's  prophecy,  "They  shall  l>ecome  one* 
flock  and  one  Shepherd,"  will  be  realized  in  the  Anglican 
Communion,  may  be  founded  upon  the  fact  that  the  Eng- 
lish civilization  seems  destined  to  become  universal,  and 
so  the  unifier  of  all  thenations  of  theearth.  Themarvel- 
mm  spread  of  the  English  language  would  seem  abund- 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


395 


antly  to  justify  this  assertion,  extravagant  as  it  may 
appear  at  first  sight.  It  is  stated  that  within  the 
present  century  the  number  of  those  who  spoke  our 
tongue  at  its  beginning  has  been  multiplied  six  times — 
from  21,000,000  in  the  year  1800  to  126,000,000  in 
A.  D.  1894.  French,  in  the  same  period,  has  not  quite 
doubled ;  German,  a  little  more  than  doubled ;  Russia 
keeps  close  pace  with  Germany,  having  risen  from 
30,000,000  to  70,000,000.  Of  the  162,000,000  people 
who  are  estimated  to  have  been  using  the  seven  leading 
European  languages  in  a.  d.  1800,  the  English  speakers 
were  less  than  13  per  cent.,  while  the  Spanish  were  16, 
the  Germans,  18.4,  the  Russians,  18.9  and  French,  19.6. 
This  aggregate  population  has  now  grown  to  400,- 
000,000  of  which  the  English-speaking  people  num- 
ber 126,000,000.  From  13  per  cent.,  we  have  ad- 
vanced to  31  per  cent.  The  French  speech  is  now  used 
by  50,000,000  people;  the  German  by  about  70,000,- 
000 ;  the  Spanish  by  40,000,000 ;  the  Russian  by  70,- 
000,000;  the  Italian  by  about  30,000,000;  and  the 
Portuguese  by  about  13,000,000.  Thus  the  EngHsh 
language  is  now  used  by  nearly  twice  as  many  people 
as  any  of  the  others. 

In  his  history  of  the  English  People,  Mr.  Green  fore- 
casts the  future  of  the  race  in  these  terms :  *'  Before  half 
a  century  is  over,  it  will  change  the  face  of  the  w^orld. 
As  tw^o  hundred  millions  of  Englishmen  fill  the  valley  of 
the  Mississippi,  as  fifty  millions  assert  their  lordship 
over  Australia,  their  vast  power  will  tell  through  Britain 
on  the  old  world  of  Europe,  whose  nations  will  have 
shrunk  into  insignificance  before  it.  What  the  issues  of 
such  a  wide-world  change  may  be,  not  even  the  w  ildest 
day-dreamer  will  dare  to  dream.  But  one  issue  is  inevi- 
table. In  the  centuries  that  lie  before  us,  the  primacy 
of  the  world  w  ill  be  with  the  English  people.    English 


r- 


\l 


m 


-'W   \ 


396 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOULD    BE    EPISCOPALIANS. 


instfttitions,  Engtfeli  speech,  English  thoughts  will  be- 
come the  main  features  of  the  political,  the  social,  the 
intellectual  life  of  mankind." 

Now  we  contend  that  the  Anglican  Communion  will 
always  follow  and  keep  up  with  the  English  language, 
that  in  proportion  as  our  civilization  unifies  the  polit- 
ical world,  our  Church  will  reunite  divided  Christendom 
and  Christianize  heathenism.     If  it  be  asked  why  she, 
rather  than  one  of  the  English-speaking  Denominations, 
may  aspire  to  become  the  Church  of  the  Reconciliation, 
the  ready  answer  is  found  in  the  simple  fact  that  she  is 
the  Historic,  the  Catholic,  the  Mother  Church  of  our 
race.    For,  other  things  being  equal,  it  is  in  the  nature 
of  things  that  her  children  and  grand-children  should 
gather  around  her  rather  than  about  any  one  of  them- 
selves.   And  how  much  more  likely  is  this  to  be  the  case 
when,  as  in  this  instance,  the  Mother  has  so  many  and 
great  advantages,  as  is  evident  from  the  fact  that  many 
of  her  distinctive  features,  after  having  been  long  re- 
jected by  her  wayward  children,  are  now  being  com- 
mended   and   adopted.      The   Church   that   has   been 
entwined   about   the  very  heart  of  the  Anglo-Saxon 
nation  and  that  of  all  its  colonies  through  their  entire 
history,  is  not  likely  to  be  abandoned  at  this  late  date 
by  such  a  conservative  race  as  we  are,  for  some  one  of 
the  many  organizations  of  the  last  three  hundred  years, 
none  of  which  have  taken  any  hold  upon  our  people  as  a 
whole.    The  Anglican  Communion  always  has  been,  is 
now,  and  ever  will  be,  the  dominant  religious  influence 
with  English-speaking  people,  and   there  is  as  much 
reason  for  believing  that  in  the  course  of  time  it  will  be- 
come all-embracing  aafor  the  belief  that  ultimately  ours 
will  be  the  universal  language.    Certainly  our  civiliza- 
tion cannot  assume  world-wide  proportions  without  the 
Church  doing  the  same,  for  she  is  its  foundation. 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


397 


In  a  day  when  the  divisions  of  Western  Christendom 
are  almost  universally  deplored,  and  when  those  whose 
ancestors  went  out  from  the  Anglican  Communion,  rep- 
resent the  "Historic  Episcopate " to  be  almost  the  only 
thing  which  prevents  them  from  returning  to  the  fold 
of  the  Mother  Church,  the  fact  that  the  great  non-Epis- 
copal Reformers  and  their  co-laborers  were  Presbyte- 
rians from  necessity,  not  preference,  should  be  more 
generally  known  than  it  is.  "Our  Churches,"  writes  a 
distinguished  Protestant  teacher,  "did  not  embrace 
the  Presbyterian  discipline  from  dislike  of  Episcopacy, 
or  because  it  seemed  to  be  opposed  to  the  Gospel,  or  to 
be  less  profitable  to  the  Church,  or  less  suitable  to 
the  condition  of  the  Lord's  true  fold,  but  because 
they  were  compelled  by  necessity.''  Luther  intended 
simply  a  temporary  departure  from  the  Episcopal 
regime.  Calvin  made  application  to  the  English  Epis- 
copate, and  John  Wesley  to  a  Greek  Bishop  for  Conse- 
cration. 

It  is  not  improbable  that  some  arrangement  would 
have  been  made  for  the  granting  of  Calvin's  request, 
had  his  letter  not  fallen  into  the  hands  of  unprincipled 
sympathizers  with  Rome,  who  forged  an  insulting  re- 
jection of  it.  Says  Archbishop  Abbot :  "  Perusing  some 
papers  of  our  predecessor,  Matthew  Parker,  we  find  that 
John  Calvin  and  others,  of  the  Protestant  Churches 
of  Germany,  and  elsewhere,  would  have  had  Epis- 
copacy, if  permitted,  but  could  not  upon  several 
accounts;  partly,  fearing  the  other  princes  of  the  Ro- 
man Catholic  faith  would  have  joined  with  the  Emperor 
and  the  rest  of  the  Popish  Bishops,  to  have  depressed 
the  same;  partly,  being  newly  reformed,  and  not  set- 
tled, they  had  not  sufficient  wealth  to  support  Episco- 
pacy, by  reason  of  their  daily  persecutions.  Another, 
and  a  main  cause  was,  they  would  not  have  any  Popish 


jiill 


I 


898 


WHY    AMERICANS   SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


i'^ 


111 


hands  laid  over  their  Clergy.   And,  whereas  John  Calvin 
had  sent  a  letter  in  King  Edward  VI.'s  reign,  to  have 
conferred  with  the  Clergj^  of  England  about  somethings 
to  this  effect,  two  Bishops,  namely,  Gardiner  and  Bonner, 
intercepted  the  same,  whereby  Mr.  Calvin's  offerture 
perished ;  and  he  received  an  answer,  as  if  it  had  been 
from  the  reformed  divines  of  those  times,  wherein  they 
checked  him,  and  slighted  his  proposals.     From  which 
time  John  Calvin  and  the  Church  of  England  were  at 
variance  on  several  points,  which  otherwise,  through 
God's  mercy,  had  been  qualified,  if  those  papers  of  his 
proposals  had  been  discovered  imto  the  Queen's  Majesty 
during  John  Calvin's  life.    But  being  not  discovered 
until  or  about  the  sixth  year  of  her  Majesty's  reign,  her 
Majesty  much  lamented  they  were  not  found  sooner; 
which  she  expressed  before  her  Council  at  the  same  time, 
in  the  presence  of  her  great  friends,  Sir  Heip  Sidney 
and  Sir  William  Cecil." 

It  is  also  worthy  of  note  that  our  Church  m  America 
to-day  stands  with  the  authority  of  the  Presbyterate 
fully  recognized,  precisely  as  the  English  Presbyterians 
of  A.  D.  1660  asked  that  it  might  be  in  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land,  when  they  professed  that  they  would  be  content 
with  the  Anglican  Episcopate,  provided  such  place  and 
such  authority  were  secured  to  the  body  of  the  Pres- 
byterate.   *an  their  celebrated  manifesto  favoring  a 
'moderate  Episcopacy,'  they  acknowledge  that  this 
was  *  agreeable  to  the  Scriptures  and  the  primitive  gov- 
ernment, and  likeliest  to  be  the  way  of  a  more  univer- 
sal concord,  if  ever  the  Churches  on  earth  arrive  at  such 
a  blessing.'     Their  idea  of  a  ^moderate  Episcopacy' 
was  precisely  that  which  has  been  restored  in  America, 
namely.  Episcopacy  ^conjunct  with  synodical  govern- 
ment ; '  the  Presbytery  and  the  Laity  being  admitted 
to  synods." 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


S99 


It  is  impossible  in  the  light  of  the  constant  and  uni- 
formly consistent  example  and  utterances  of  the  Wes- 
leys,  to  believe  they  ever  intended  their  followers  to 
separate  from  the  Church  of  England,  or  that  John  Wes- 
ley intended  to  be  understood  as  conveying  Episcopal 
authority  upon  Dr.  Coke,  when,  by  imposition  of  hands, 
he  set  this  Priest  of  the  English  Church  apart  for  the 
superin tendency  of  the  Methodist  Societies  in  America. 
The  Wesley  brothers  lived  and  died  in  the  Communion 
and  Priesthood  of  the  Church.  That  Charles  Wesley 
did  this,  has  never  been  questioned,  and  that  John 
Wesley  did  so,  is  evident  from  his  own  reiterated  state- 
ment and  deathbed  prayer.  In  answer  to  his  followers 
who  wanted  to  go  out,  and  to  his  enemies  who  accused 
him  of  meditating  an  exodus,  he  always  replied  to  the 
day  of  his  death :  *'  I  never  had  any  design  of  separat- 
ing from  the  Church.  I  have  now  no  such  design,  and  I 
declare  once  more,  that  I  live  and  die  a  member  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  that  none  who  regard  my  judg- 
ment or  advice  will  ever  separate  from  it."  And  when 
his  last  hour  came,  he  prayed :  "  We  thank  Thee,  0 
Lord ,  for  these  and  all  Thy  mercies.  Bless  the  Church 
and  King.  And  grant  us  truth  and  peace,  through 
Jesus  Christ  our  Lord  forever  and  ever."  We  also 
have  the  conclusive  evidence  afforded  by  the  circular 
letter  addressed  by  the  Methodist  Conference  to  the 
Societies,  in  which  they  say:  *^Our  venerable  father, 
who  is  gone  to  his  great  reward,  lived  and  died  a  mem- 
ber and  a  friend  of  the  Church  of  England.  His  attach- 
ment to  it  was  so  strong  and  so  unshaken,  that  nothing 
but  irresistible  necessity  induced  him  to  deviate  from 
it  in  anv  dej^ree." 

Methodists  claim  that  Mr.  Wesley  intended  to  conse- 
crate Dr.  Coke,  his  brother  in  the  Priesthood,  a  Bishop, 
when  he  blessed  him  upon  his  departure  to  assume  the 


i  :l 


1  ' 


i  j 


400 


WHY   AMERICANS   SHOULD    BE   EPISCOPALIANS. 


direction  of  the  American  societies.  But  it  is  difficult 
to  reconcile  this  view  with  his  words  as  quoted  above, 
or  with  his  rebuke  of  Mr.  Asbury,  when  he  began  to  as- 
sume the  title  and  exercise  the  functions  of  a  Bishop, 
upon  the  ground  of  his  ordination  by  Dr.  Coke.  "  How 
can  you,"  said  Mr.  Wesley,  ''how  dare  you  suffer  your- 
self to  be  called  a  Bishop  ?  I  shudder,  I  start  at  the 
very  thought !  Men  may  call  me  a  knave  or  a  fool,  a 
rascal,  a  scoundrel,  and  I  am  content ;  but  they  shall 
never,  by  my  consent,  call  me  Bishop.  For  my  sake, 
for  God's  sake,  for  Christ's  sake,  put  a  full  end  to  this. 
Let  the  Presbyterians  do  what  they  please,  but  let  the 
Methodists  know  their  calHng  better." 

Even  if  it  be  granted  that  Wesley  did  intend  to  in- 
vest Coke  with  the  Episcopal  character,  it  must  be 
admitted  that  he  was  the  only  person  ordained  to  the 
Episcopate  by  him,  and  that  Francis  Asbury  was  the 
only  so-called  Bishop  ordained  by  Coke.  Methodist 
Bishops  must  then  trace  their  authority  to  Asbury, 
whose  Episcopacy  was  thus  earnestly  repudiated  by  the 
founder  of  Methodism,  and  with  it,  of  course,  their  own 
pretensions  to  any  office  higher  than  the  general  super- 
intendency  which  Asbury  was  permitted  to  retain.  Nor 
must  we  lose  sight  of  the  significant  fact  that,  according 
to  Wesley's  letter  of  instruction.  Coke  was  sent  to  Amer- 
ica to  minister  to  persons  "  who  adhered  to  the  doctrine 
and  discipline  of  the  Church  of  England."  He  was  not 
commissioned  to  found  the  Methodist  Episcopal  ('hurch. 
It  is  said  that  there  is  not  at  this  time  a  single  descend- 
ant of  the  Wesleys  in  any  of  the  Methodist  Communions. 
Three  grandsons  of  Charles  Wesley  have  been  Clergymen 
of  the  Church  of  England.  In  this  they  are  following 
the  precept  and  exampleof  their  distinguished  ancestor. 

From  this  it  will  appear  that  there  is  not  a  Lutheran, 
or  a  Presbyterian,  or  a  Methodist  in  the  United  States 


CHRISTIAN    UNITY. 


401 


who  would  not,  if  he  followed  the  express  preference  of 
the  man  whom  he  venerates  as  the  founder  and  pillar 
of  his  Denomination,  find  his  way  into  the  Episcopal 
Church.  The  same  also  might  be  said  of  Congregation- 
alists,  for  Brown  who  led  them  out,  in  his  old  age, 
returned  to  the  fold  and  ministry  of  the  Church.  "  The 
Baptist,  Congregational  and  Methodist  Churches  could 
construct  no  platform  of  Church  Unity  more  Catholic, 
practical  and  helpful  than  the  Quadrilateral ;  while  the 
Lutheran,  Reformed  and  Presbyterian  Churches  could 
adopt  no  other  without  largely  ignoring  their  own 
standards  and  history." 


In  conclusion,  let  me  answer  a  practical  question 
which  every  one,  who  recognizes  the  evils  of  a  divided 
Church  and  desires  to  do  the  will  of  Christ,  should  ask 
himself:  "  What  can  I  do  to  bring  about  the  visible 
organic  unity  among  Christians  for  which  our  blessed 
Lord  prayed,  and  upon  which  He  makes  the  evangeliza- 
tion and  salvation  of  the  world  to  depend?  " 

As  you  no  doubt  have  anticipated,  my  answer  to 
this,  the  greatest  question  which  a  Christian  of  these 
days  can  ask  himself,  so  far  as  it  relates  to  the  sons  and 
daughters  of  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church,  is :  Pray 
and  work  for  the  return  of  your  brothers  and  sisters  of 
ever}^  Denomination  to  the  Mother  Church  of  the  Eng- 
lish-speaking race.  And  to  those  who  are  living  in 
separation  from  her,  let  me  say:  Study  the  claims  of  the 
Mother  Church  upon  you,  and  when  you  have  become 
convinced  that  they  are  superior  to  those  of  the  Denom- 
ination to  which  you  belong,  return  without  delay  to 
your  ancestral  home  where  a  warm  welcome  awaits  you. 
Then  others  will  follow  your  example,  and  others  theirs, 
and  so  on  in  increasing  numbers,  according  to  the  law 

C.  A.~26 


MM 


WHY   AMERICANS  SHOUtB  BB  UPISCOPALIANS. 


of  natural  progression,  until  the  way  will  be  pre- 
pared for  the  return  of  whole  families  of  the  Mother 
Church's  wayward  children.  It  will  be  hard  for  you  to 
take  the  step.  In  many  cases  it  will  require  much  cour- 
age  and  great  sacrifices ;  but— I  speak  from  personal  ex- 
perience, and  there  are  many  others,  some  of  whom  are 
to  be  found  in  almost  every  community,  who  will  bear 
witness  to  the  same  effect— when  once  you  are  within  the 
embrace  of  the  dear  Mother  Church,  there  will  be  no  re- 
gret, but  your  satisfaction  and  happiness  will  find  ex- 
pression in  the  beautiful  poem  written  by  Bishop  Coxe, 
after  he  had  taken  the  step  which  I  am  advising  you 
to  take : 

••1  love  the  Church,  the  Holy  Church, 
The  Saviour's  spotless  bride, 
And  O,  I  love  her  palaces, 

Through  all  the  world  so  wide. 

"Unbroken  is  her  lineage, 

Her  warrants  clear  as  when 
Thou,  Saviour,  didst  go  up  on  high, 
And  give  good  gifts  to  men. 

"Here  clothed  in  innocence  they  stand, 
Thine  Holy  Orders  three, 
To  rule  and  feed,  Thy  flock,  O  Christ, 
And  ever  watch  for  Thee. 

"  I  love  the  Church,  the  Holy  Church, 
That  o*er  our  life  presides, 
The  birth,  the  bridal  and  the  grave, 
And  many  an  hour  besides. 

"Be  mine  through  life  to  live  in  her. 
And  when  the  Lord  shall  call, 
To  die  in  her,  the  Spouse  of  Christ, 
The  Mother  of  us  all." 


The  Church  for  Americans. 


Appendices  and  Supplementary  Articles. 


I.  LiGHTPOOT :  Apostolic  Origin  of  the  Three- 
fold Ministry. 

II.  Bishop  Grisw^old  on  the   Presbyterian   Hy- 
pothesis. 

III.  Washington  a  Communicant. 

IV.  Franklin  an  Episcopalian. 
V.  Jefferson  an  Episcopalian. 

VI.  The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  and 
the  Faith  of  Its  Framers. 

VII.  Growth  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
VIII.  Non-Episcopalian  Encomiums  on  the  Prayer 
Book. 

IX.  John  Wesley  Always  an  Episcopalian. 
X.  Pope  Pius  IV.  and  the  English  Prayer  Book. 
XI.  Greek  Catholics  and  Anglican  Orders. 
XII.  John  Wesley  on  the  Ministerial  Office. 

XIII.  The  Nine  Hundred  and  Ninety-Nine  Years' 
Lease. 

XIV.  Continuity  of  the  English   Church  Proved 
»y  the  Uninterrupted  Succession  of  Her  Bishops. 

(403) 


404 


APPENDICES. 


XV.  The  English  Opifrch  Did  Not  Secede  from 

Rome. 

XVI.  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe. 
XVII.  Henry  Clay. 
XVIII.  Reformed  Episcopalians. 
XIX.  Extempore  Prayer  and  Experience  Meetings. 
XX.  Vestments — A  Layman  on. 
XXI.  UaxVCIng,  Card  Playing  and  Theatre  Going. 
XXII.  The   Episcopal   Church  the   Church  of  the 

Poor. 

XXIII.  Fermented  Commuhion  Wine,  Objection  to, 

Considered. 

XXIV.  The  Declaration  of  Independence  and  the 

Faith  of  Its  Signers. 

XXV.  Perpetuity  :  An  Additional  Reason  for  Being 

AN  Episcopalian. 

XXVI.  New  York  :  Statistics  of  the  Chief  Bodies 

of  Protestant  Christians  in  1895. 

XXVII.  Statistics  of   English   Speaking    Bodies    op 
Christians  in  the  World. 
XXVIII.  Catholic 


M.» 


LIGHTFOOT:    APOSTOLIC    ORIGIN   OF    THE 
THREEFOLD   MINISTRY. 

Lecture  III;  Page  184. 

"^  I  "HE  following  self-explanatory  correspondence,  which  ap- 

peared  in  the  "  Church  Guardian,"  of  Montreal,  and  was 

republished  in  the  "Living  Church,"  of  Chicago,  will  be  of 

interest  to  many : 

LocKEPORT,  N.  S.,  March  1,  1887. 
To  THE  Editor  of  the  '  Church  Guardian  : ' 

Sir  :  Having  been  shown  a  speech  by  a  Presbyterian 
minister,  in  which  he  claimed  that  Dr.  Lightfoot,  Bishop  of 
Durham,  acknowledged  that  Presbyterian  order  was  the  rule 
in  Apostolic  times,  I  wrote  his  Lordship,  and  received  from 
his  chaplain  the  following  reply,  which  may  be  of  much  service 
in  refuting  the  views  imputed  to  the  great  orientalist,  histo- 
rian and  commentator.  S.  G. 


AuKLAND  Castle. 
The  Rev.  S.  Gibbons. 

Sir  :  The  Bishop  of  Durham  finds  to  his  great  regret  that, 
owing  to  the  great  pressure  of  work  by  which  he  is  sur- 
rounded, your  letter  respecting  the  Christian  ministry  has 
remained  unanswered. 

The  Bishop  desires  me  to  say  that  so  far  from  establish- 
ing as  the  fact  that  '  Presbyterianism  was  the  first  form  of 
Church  government,'  his  essay  goes  to  prove  that  Deacons 
existed  before  Priests,  and  yet  no  one  would  contend  that 
Church  government  by  Deacons  was  the  '  first  form,'  hence  the 
writer's  argument,  based  on  priority  of  time,  proves  too  much 
for  his  taste.  It  is,  however,  generally  allowed  that  the 
names  of  Presbuteros  and  Episcopos  in  the  New  Testament 
are  sometimes  synonymous,  Acts,  20 :  17 ;  I  Peter,  5:1,2;  I 
Tim.,  3  :  1-13,  where  the  Apostle  passes  at  once  to  Deacons 
from  Episcopos,  Titus,  1 :  5,  7 ;  but  even  in  the  times  covered 

(405) 


i 


]■ 


406 


AWFMmncm. 


%j  tlie  New  Testament  writings,  we  see  in  the  lifetime  of  the 
Apostles  individuals  singled  out  to  preside  over  certain 
Churches  and  to  exercise  powers  of  ordination,  government 
and  presidency,  as  Titus  at  Crete,  James  at  Jerusalem,  Tim- 
othy at  Ephesus;  and  though  the  evidence  is  necessarily 
limited,  we  find  in  Asia  Minor  Episcopacy  pure  and  simple, 
appointed  and  established,  no  doubt  by  the  influence  of  St. 
John,  at  the  date  of  the  Ignatian  Epistles,  and  its  institution 
can  be  plainly  traced  as  far  back  as  the  closing  years  of  the 

first  century. 

We  see  the  threefold  ministry  traced  to  Apostolic  direc- 
tion, and  this  bears  out  the  truth  of  our  Prayer  Book  Preface 
IK)  the  Ordinal,  and  is  the  belief  of  the  Anglican  community. 

I  regret  that  in  a  brief  letter  so  much  must  be  passed 
©ver  ancTso  inadequate  an  account  be  given  of  so  interesting 
and  absorbing  a  subject. 

But  enough  has  been  said  to  prove  that  the  Presby- 
terian's deduction  from  the  Bishop  of  Durham's  article  is  not 
justified  by  the  facts.  Yours  faithfully 

J.  R.  Harmeb,  Chaplain. 

January  20, 1887. 


II, 

BISHOP  GRISWOLD  ON  THE  PRESBYTERIAN 

HYPOTHESIS, 

Ijgcture  III;  "Wmi^  184. 

**TT  i»  often  affirmed  but  has  never  been  proved,  that  the 
-*■  ministers  of  Christ  were,  at  first,  all  of  one  grade, 
and  that  the  Bishops  usurped  the  authority,  which,  it  is  ac- 
knowledged, they,  in  the  early  ages,  possessed.  But  this  is 
absurd,  and  altogether  incredible.  It  is  absurd  to  suppose 
that  those,  now  called  "Bishops,  made  such  a  change.  Because, 
if  the  government  of  the  Church  was  left  by  the  Apostles  in 
the  hands  of  Presbyters,  they,  the  Presbyters,  must  have  made 
the  change.  On  this  supposition,  there  were  no  Bishops  to 
abuse  power ;  the  Presbyters  usurped  authority,  and  made  the 
change.     If  a  thing  so  strange  and  so  wicked  was  done  at  all, 


THE    PRESBYTERIAN    HYPOTHESIS. 


407 


it  was  done  by  Presbyterians  or  Congregationalists.  Those 
who  advance  this  position  virtually  say,  that  within  one  or  two 
centuries  at  most,  after  the  government  was  put  into  their 
hands,  they  all,  in  every  country,  agreed  in  changing  it  to  what 
Christ  never  intended.  They  certainly  do  very  little  honor  to 
that  mode  of  Church  government,  by  supposing  it  so  defective 
and  inefficient  as  to  be  so  soon  relinquished. 

"  It  must,  too,  be  difficult  for  us  to  believe,  that,  in  the  first 
three  centuries,  men  should  have  been  ambitious  of  the  Episco- 
pate, when  its  worldly  advantages  were  so  small,  and  its  sacri- 
fices and  perils  so  great.     Martyrdom  in    those  ages  might 
almost  be  considered  as  annexed  to  a  bishopric.     The  general 
practice  of  the  persecutor  was  to  smite  the  shepherd,  that  the 
sheep  might  be  scattered;  the  Bishop  was  usually  the  first  led 
to  tortures  and  to  death.     How  can  we,  in  reason,  believe  that 
under  such  circumstances,  so  great  a  change  should  be  made 
in  the  "government  of  the  Church  ?  that  the  holy  martyrs  of 
that  time,  which  truly  '  tried  men's  souls,'  should  either  attempt 
or  desire  to  alter  the  institutions  of  Christ  ?     And  had  such  a 
change  by  some  Churches  been  attempted,  it  seems  morally 
impossible  that  it  should  have  become  general.     And  yet  we 
are  sure  from  all  ancient  history,  that  Episcopacy  was  general 
from  a  very  early  period  down  to  the  Reformation.     During 
the  first  fifteen  centuries,  it  is  not  easy  to  name  any  one  part  of 
Christianity,   in    which   all    Christians   were    more    generally 
united  than  in  what  we  now  call  Episcopacy.     Were  we  to 
admit  that  so  great  and  material  a  change  was  made  in  our 
religion,  without  being  recorded  in  history,  we  might  well  fear 
that  other  great  changes  were  also  made;  that  even  the  Scrip- 
tures were  altered.     If  all  the   Churches  would  agree  in  cor- 
rupting one  part,  why  not  in  corrupting  another  part?     In  any 
part  of  the  first  three  centuries,  it  would  have  been  as  difficult 
to  produce  such  a  change,  as  it  would  be  in  our  day.     And  to 
me,  certainly  such  a  change,  so  silent,  so  peaceable,  and  so 
general,  without  opposition,  or  any  historical  record,  is  a  moral 


i 


>t 


APPENDICES. 


impossibility.  SliouM  there  be  any  liere  who  think  differently 
on  this  point,  they  will  not,  I  trust,  regret  having  heard  what 
we  think  on  a  subject  which  so  much  concerns  us  all.  Nothing 
will  tend  more  to  unite  Christians  in  love,  than  candidly  hear- 
ing from  each  other  the  hope  that  is  in  them.  And,  indeed,  if 
differing  Denominations  of  Christians  are  ever  brought  to  strive 
together  for  the  faith  of  the  Gospel,  it  will  be  by  their  first 
uniting  in  the  government,  whatever  they  may  decide  it  to 
be,  which  God  has  set  in  the  Church." 


WASHINGTON  A    COMMUNICANT. 
liEcrruRE  V ;  Page  289. 

TT  is  not  clisptifed  that  Washfegton  was  an  adherent  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  and  a  regular  and  devout  attendant  upon 
her  Services,  but  the  statement  that  he  was  also  a  Communi- 
cant is  sometimes  questioned.  In  an  interesting  contribution 
to  the  "  Living  Church  "  of  June  29,  1895,  the  Rev.  Wm.  E. 
Hooker  settles  this  question.  He  says  :  "  I  have  in  my  library 
this  volume,  entitled*  *  Memoirs  of  Washington,  by  his 
adopted  son,  George  Washington  Parke  Custis.'  There  is  as 
well  a  memoir  of  the  author,  by  his  daughter,  with  notes  by 
Benson  J.  Lossing.  The  work  was  published  in  1859.  On 
page  173,  the  writer  speaks  of  Washington  as  a  strict  observer 
of  the  Lord's  Day,  and  of  his  habit  of  attending  public  wor- 
ship;  of  his  respect  for  the  Clergy;  of  his  friendship  for 
Bishop  White  and  Archbishop  Carroll  of  the  Roman  See  of 
Baltimore.  Then  in  a  foot  note,  on  the  same  page,  is  this  state- 
ment :  *  Washington  was  a  member  in  full  Communion  of  the 
Protestant  Episcopal  Church  and  was  for  many  years  before 
and  after  the  Revolution,  a  vestryman  in  Truro  parish,  whose 
Church,  Pohick,  built  under  his  supervision,  is  yet  standing.'" 
"  I  have  before  me,"  he  continues,  "  the  original  drawing  of 


WASHINGTON    A    COMMUNICANT. 


409 


the  ground  plan  and  elevation  of  that  Church,  made  by  Wash- 
ington himself.  He  was  also  a  Vestryman,  previous  to  the 
Revolution,  in  Fairfax  parish,  whose  Church,  wherein  he 
frequently  worshipped,  is  yet  standing  in  the  city  of  Alex- 
andria. While  President  of  the  United  States  and  residing 
in  New  York,  he  attended  St.  Paul's  Church  ;  in  Philadelphia, 
Christ  Church."  "  A  member  in  full  Communion  "  is  merely 
another  way  of  designating  a  Communicant.  And  this  state- 
ment is  unqualifiedly  made  by  one  of  Washington's  own 
family,  his  son  by  adoption.  Mr.  Custis,  himself  a  Church- 
man, died  in  1857. 

To  this  weighty  testimony  cited  by  Mr.  Hooker,  may  be 
added  a  passage  almost  equally  conclusive  to  which  the  late 
learned  Dr.  Bolles  calls  attention  in  his  » W^ashington,  A 
Centennial  Discourse : "  "  In  the  twelfth  volume  of  the  writ- 
ings of  Washington,  Sparks  has  a  remarkable  note  as  follows  : 
'  I  shall  here  insert  a  letter  written  me  by  a  lady  who  lived 
twenty  years  ago  in  Washington's  family,  and  who  was  his 
adopted  daughter  and  the  granddaughter  of  Mrs.  Washington. 
The  writer  of  this  letter  married  Lawrence  Lewis,  the  nephew 
of  Washington.'  It  is  dated  Woodlawn,  February  26,  1833. 
It  is  too  long  for  reproduction  in  these  notes.  I  give  some 
extracts  from  it,  namely  :  *  My  mother  resided  two  years  at 
Mount  Vernon  after  her  marriage.  I  have  heard  her  say  that 
General  Washington  always  received  the  Sacrament  with  my 
grandmother  before  the  Revolution.' " 

The  Honorable  Mr.  Sewall  of  New  Hampshire  said :  "  To 
crown  all  his  virtues  he  had  the  deepest  sense  of  religion.  He 
was  a  constant  attendant  on  public  worship  and  a  communicant 
at  the  Lord's  Table.  I  shall  never  forget  the  impression 
made  by  seeing  this  leader  of  our  hosts  bending  in  this  house 
of  prayer  in  humble  adoration  of  the  God  of  armies  and  the 
Author  of  our  salvation." 

General  Porterfield,  his  aid,  testifies  :  "  General  Washing- 
ton was  a  pious  man,  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  Church.     I 


ilO 


Jii^PSVUICBS* 


I     'ft! 

! 


saw  Mm  myself  oif  ih  lue^i  f^i^f^  the  Lord's  Supper  at 
Philadelphia.  As  brigade  inspector  I  often  waited  on  Wash- 
ington in  the  army,  and  going  once,  without  warning,  to  his 
headquarters,  I  found  him  on  his  knees  at  his  morning  devo- 
tions. I  was  often  in  his  company  under  very  exciting  cir- 
cumstances, and  never  heard  him  swear  or  profane  the  name 
of  God  in  any  way." 

Major  Popham,  a  Revolutionary  officer  much  with  Wash- 
ington, testifies  that,  "he  attended  the  same  Church  with 
Washington  during  his  Presidency,  that  the  President  often 
communed,  and  that  he  had  the  privilege  of  kneeling  and 
communing  with  him." 

Mr.  Edward  Everett  in  his  famous  oration  on  the  "  Life  and 
Character  of  Washington,"  says :  "  Washington  was  brought 
up  in  the  Episcopal  Communion,  and  was  a  member  of  the 
vestry  of  two  Churches.  He  was  at  all  times  a  regular  attend- 
ant upon  public  worship,  and  an  occasional  partaker  of  the 
Communion." 

The  Honorable  R.  C.  Winthrop,  who  was  one  of  the  orators 
»t  the  laying  of  the  corner  stone  of  Washington's  monument, 
and  also  at  its  dedication,  gives  the  following  testimony  : 
♦*  True  to  his  friends,  true  to  his  country  and  to  himself ;  fear- 
ing God,  believing  in  Christ,  no  stranger  to  private  devotion, 
or  to  the  holiest  offices  of  the  Church  to  which  he  belonged; 
but  ever  gratefully  acknowledging  a  Divine  aid  and  direction 
in  everything  he  attempted,  and  in  everything  he  accom- 
plished. What  epithet,  what  attribute  could  be  added  to  that 
consummate  character,  to  commend  it  as  an  example  above 
all  other  characters  in  human  history  ! " 

The  learned  Historiogra])her  of  the  American  Episcopal 
Church  says  :  "  That  Washington  was  a  communicant  of  the 
Church  previous  to  the  war  of  the  Revolution,  admits  of  no 
doubt,  if  any  regard  is  to  be  paid  to  the  testimony  of  numer- 
ous witnesses  who  could  not  have  been  deceived.  That  he 
was  not  a  frequent  or  regular  communicant  after  the  War  and 


FRANKLIN    AN    EPISCOrALlAN. 


411 


while  in  public  office,  is  equally  certain,  but  the  testimony 
adduced  by  the  celebrated  Dr.  Chapman,  a  distinguished 
Clergyman  of  the  Church,  is  conclusive  as  to  his  occasional 
reception.  Dr.  Chapman's  words  are  as  follows  :  "  From  the 
lips  of  a  lady  of  undoubted  veracity,  yet  living,  and  a  worthy 
communicant  of  the  Church,  I  received  the  interesting  fact 
that  soon  after  the  close  of  the  Revolutionary  War  she  saw 
him  partake  of  the  consecrated  symbols  of  tlie  Body  and 
Blood  of  Christ,  in  Trinity  Church,  in  the  city  of  New  York." 
"  Major  Popham's  testimony  '  that  he  believed  without  a 
doubt  that  they  both.  President  and  Lady  Washington, 
received  the  Holy  Communion'  at  St.  Paul's,  New  York, 
comes  from  one  who  had  every  possible  opportunity  to  know 
whereof  he  affirmed." 


IV. 


FRANKLIN  AN  EPISCOPALIAN. 


Lecture  V;  Page  290. 

TN  a  letter  addressed  to  his  daughter,  under  date  of  Novem- 
^  ber  8,»  1754,  Dr.  Benjamin  Franklin  writes:  "Go  con- 
stantly to  Church.  The  act  of  devotion  in  the  Common 
Prayer  Book  is  your  princi[)al  business  there,  and,  if  properly 
attended  to,  will  do  more  towards  amending  the  heart  than 
sermons  generally  do.  I  wish  you  would  never  miss  the 
prayer  days."  Bishop  Coleman  points  out  that  "it  was  he 
who,  when  the  Convention  of  1787,  for  framing  the  Federal 
Constitution,  had  made  but  small  progress  in  its  business, 
proposed  that  the  Clergy  of  Philadel[)hia  should  be  invited  to 
say  prayers  at  the  morning  sessions  of  the  Convention." 
AJPter  the  Revolution,  Franklin  was  at  the  pains  of  revising 
the  Prayer  Book  to  suit  tlie  altered  conditions  and  his  own 
ideas,  which,  to  say  the  least,  were  somewhat  eccentric.     Our 


412 


APPENDICES. 


I- 

r 

!l 
il 


Historiographer  says :  "  Bishop  White  had  this  work  in  his 
hand  when  the  *  Proposed  Book '  was  in  process  of  preparation 
by  the  committee  consisting  of  Provost  Smith,  of  the  Univer- 
sity of  Pennsylvania,  William  White  and  Charles  H.  Whar- 
ton, the  latter  being  the  first  convert  from  Romanism  to  the 
faith  of  the  American  Church.** 


V. 


JEFFERSON  AN  EPISCOPALIAN. 
Lecture  V;  Page  289. 

A  CORRESPONDENT  of  "The  Churchman"  recently 
communicated  to  that  paper  the  following  extract  from 
Dr.  John  Stoughton's  "History  of  Religion  in  England:" 
"  Bishop  Wilberforce,  in  his  *  American  Church,'  p.  175,  calls 
him  the  *  Deist  Jefferson,'  but  I  have  before  me  an  autograph 
letter  by  Jefferson,  dated  August  10,  1823,  in  which,  reply- 
ing to  some  application  for  pecuniary  aid,  he  says  : 

'The  principle  that  every  religious  sect  is  to  maintain  its 
own  teachers  and  institutions  is  too  reasonable,  and  too  well 
established  in  our  country  to  need  justification.  I  have  been, 
from  my  infancy,  a  member  of  the  Episcopalian  Church,  and 
to  that  I  owe  and  make  my  contributions.  Were  I  to  go 
beyond  that  limit  in  favor  of  any  other  sectarian  Institution ' 
I  should  be  equally  bound  to  do  so  for  every  other,  and  their 
number  is  beyond  the  faculties  of  any  individual.  I  believe, 
therefore,  that  in  this,  as  in  every  other  case,  everything  will 
be  better  conducted  if  left  to  those  immediately  interested. 
On  these  grounds  I  trust  that  your  candor  will  excuse  my  re- 
turning the  inclosed  paper  without  my  subscription ;  and  that 
you  will  accept  the  assurance  of  my  great  personal  respect  and 
esteem.  '  Th.  Jefferson.'  " 

The  publication  of  this  letter,  says  Bishop  Perry,  elicited 
from  the  granddaughter  of  .lefferson,  Sarah  N.  Randolph,  who 
was  engaged  in  preparing  a  conr]:)lete  edition  of  her  ancestor's 
works,  a  letter  under  darte  of  May  19,  1888,  confirmatory  of 


THE    CONSTITUTION. 


413 


the  statement  made  in  text.     The   closing  paragraph  of  this 
letter  is  as  follows  : 

"  It  may  interest  you  to  know  that  I  have  Mr.  Jefferson's 
little  pocket  Prayer  Book,  which  he  used  in  his  constant  at- 
tendance at  the  Episcopal  Church,  in  Charlottesville.  For  a 
long  time,  too,  there  was  in  the  possession  of  my  family  a 
little  folding  chair  or  camp  stool  of  his  own  invention,  so 
made  that  it  looked,  when  it  closed,  like  a  stout  cane.  This 
he  carried  in  hand,  though  on  horseback,  and  used  as  his 
seat  in  Church.  Pardon  this  long  letter  with  which  I  have 
presumed  to  inflict  a  stranger,  and  believe  me  to  be. 

Yours  respectfully,  Sarah  N.  Randolph." 


VI. 


THE  CONSTITUTION  OF   THE   UNITED  STATES  AND   THE 

FAITH  OF  ITS  FHAMERS. 

Lecture  V;  Pages  278-292. 

TN  his  little  publication,  "The  Faith  of  the  Framers  of  the 
-■"  Constitution  of  the  United  States,"  the  Bishop  of  Iowa 
gives  a  most  interesting  account  of  the  Church  relationship, 
so  far  as  it  can  be  ascertained  by  the  most  painstaking  investi- 
gation, of  those  who  in  Convention  assembled  formed  our  ^ 
Constitution  and  affixed  their  signatures  to  this  all-important 
national  document.  I  give  the  result  of  Dr.  Perry's  investi- 
gation without  the  proofs  : 

New  Hampshire  —  John  Langdon,  Congregationalist ; 
Nicholas  Oilman,  Congregationalist. 

Massachusetts  —  Nathaniel  Gorham,  Congregationalist; 
Rufus  King,  Episcopalian. 

Connecticut  —  William    Samuel    Johnson,    Episcopalian  ; ' 
Roger  Sherman,  Congregationalist. 

New  York — Alexander  Hamilton,  Episcopalian. 

New  Jersey  —  William  Livingstone,  Presbyterian  ;  David 
Brearly,  Episcopalian;  William  Patterson,  Presbyterian; 
Jonathan  Dayton,  Episcopalian. 


APPEKDICBS. 


Pennsylvania  —  Benjamin  Franklin,  Episcopalian;  Thomas 
Mifflin,  Episcopalian;  Robert  Morris,  Episcopalian;  George 
Clymer,  Episcopalian  ;  Thomas  Fitzsimons,  Roman  Catholic  ; 
Jared  Ingersoll,  probably  Episcopalian.  His  descendants  are 
Episcopalians,  and  have  been  so  for  several  generations. 
James  Wilson,  Episcopalian ;  Gouverneur  Morris,  Episco- 
palian. 

Delaware  —  George  Read,  Episcopalian;  Gunning  Bed- 
ford, Jr.,  Presbyterian  ;  John  Dickinson,  originally  a  Quaker, 
but  in  later  life  inclined  toward  the  Episcopal  Church.  He 
was  a  liberal  contributor  to  the  funds  of  the  Church  Corpora- 
tion for  the  relief  of  the  widows  and  orphans  of  our  Clergy. 
Richard  Bassett,  originally  an  Episcopalian,  but  later  in  life  a 
Methodist ;  Jacob  Brown,  Episcopalian. 

Maryland  —  James  McHenry,  Presbyterian;  Daniel  of 
Jenifer,  Episcopalian  ;   Daniel  Carroll,  Roman  Catholic. 

Virginia  —  George  Washington,  Episcopalian  ;  John  Blair, 
Episcopalian  ;  James  Madison,  Jr.,  Episcopalian. 

North  Carolina  —  William  Blount,  Episcopalian  ;  Richard 
D.  Spright,  Episcopalian  ;  Hugh  Williamson,  Presbyterian. 

South  Carolina  —  John  Rutledge,  Episcopalian;  Charles 
C.  Pinckney,  Episcopalian ;  Charles  Pinckney,  Episcopalian ; 
Pierce  Butler,  Episcopalian. 

Georgia  —  William  Few,  Episcopalian;  Abraham  Bald- 
win, Congregationalist. 

This  list,  as  Bishop  Perry  observes,  shows  that  about  two- 
,  thirds  of  those  who  framed  and  attested  by  their  signatures 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  were  connected  with  the 
Episcopal  Church.  He  gives  the  names  of  some  ten  or  twelve 
more  or  less  distinguished  members  of  the  Convention  who 
were  Episcopalians,  but  who,  owing  to  necessary  absence  at 
the  time  of  the  completion  of  the  work,  did  not  affix  their  sig- 
natures to  the  Constitution.  Surely  it  must  be  conceded  that 
the  learned  Bishop  is  right  when  he  says  :  "  No  other  religious 
body  in  the  land,  if  judged  in  the  light  of  history,  has  any 
claim  to  be  compared  with,  or  to  be  regarded  as  the  American 
Church."* 


*  See  Appendix  XXIV. 


VII. 

GROWTH   OF    THE   EPISCOPAL    CHURCH. 
Lecture  V;  Page  304. 

OUR  growth  during  the  ten  years  covered  by  the  last 
census,  1880-1890,  has  been  indeed  phenomenal  as 
will  appear  from  the  following  tabulated  statement  of  com- 
municants : 


1880 


Alabama 

Arkansas 

California 

Colorado 

Connecticut 

Dakotas  (two) 

Delaware 

Florida 

Georgia 

Illinois 

Indiana 

Iowa 

Kansas 

Kentucky  

Louisiana 

Maine 

Maryland  and  Dist.  of  Columbia 

Massachusetts 

Michigan 

Minnesota 

Mississippi 

Missouri 

Montana 

Nebraska 

Nevada  

New  Hampshire 


3,955 

1,010 

4,323 

1,758 

20,953 

1,746 

2,026 

1,789 

4,536 

11,320 

3,830 

4,203 

2,187 

4,295 

3,782 

2,170 

23,573 

18,076 

10,749 

5,243 

2,386 

5,413 

575 

1,926 

315 

2,066 


1890 


6,196 

2,200 

11,239 

4,366 

27,374 

3,680 

2,943 

4,409 

5,975 

20,040 

6,126 

6,526 

3,072 

7,079 

5,256 

3,080 

30,956 

29,487 

18,482 

10,973 

3,281 

9,356 

1,514 

4,274 

576 

2,894 


Per  cent. of 
iucrease. 


56— 

117-- 

159— 

154- - 

30-- 

110-- 

45-- 

146-- 

31— 

76-- 

59— 

55— 

40-- 

64-- 

38— 

41-- 

31— 

63— 

71— 

109-- 

37— 

72— 

163— 

121-- 

82— 

40-- 


(415) 


i 


416 


APPJBNmCSS. 


New  Jersey . . .  • .  •  -  •  •»  •  ..••••  •  •  •  ■  • 

New  Mexico  anil  Arizona* 

New  York • 

North  Carolina 

Ohio •  •  • 

Oregon  

Pennsylvania 

Rhode  Island • 

South  Carolina 

Tennessee 

Texas  

Utah 

Vermont 

Virginia 

Washington 

West  Virginia 

Wisconsin   

Wyoming  and  Idaho 


«    *    •    w    » 


1S80 


16,632 
176 
87,364 
5,836 
11,693 
737 
89,251 
6,821 
4,686 
3,500 
4,388 
385 
3,488 
13,951 
839 
1,945 
7,133 
371 


29,821 

696 

131,437 

8,410 

18,057 
2,265 

58,875 

10,388 
5,737 
6,044 
7,379 
767 
4,244 

19,042 
2,585 
8,109 

10,609 
1,733 


Per  cent. of 
increase. 


78-- 

297-- 

50-- 

54-- 
207- - 

52-- 

22+ 
72— 
68-- 
yy 

21-- 
37- • 
662-- 
59-- 
48-- 
367-- 


VIII. 

NON-EPISCOPALIAN  ENCOMIUMS  ON  THE 

PRA  YER  BOOK. 


Lecture  VI;  Page  318. 

THE  following  passages  bearing  testimony  to  the  unrivaled 
excellency  of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  are  collected 
from  the  writings  of  representatives  of  nearly  all  the  chief 
bodies  of  Christians,  or  from  what  unbiased  literary  critics  have 
to  say  about  our  Liturgy.  The  first  quotation  shall  be  from 
Taine's  "  History  of  English  Literature."  The  author  of  this 
famous  work,  by  common  consent  the  best  upon  the  subject, 
was,  I  suppose,  a  French  Protestant.  I  give  what  he  has  to  say 
somewhat  at  length,  because  of  his  extracts  from  the  Prayer 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


417 


Book  which  will  enable  those  not  acquainted  with  it,  to  form 
something  of  an  independent  estimation  of  its  merits. 

"This  Prayer  Book  is  an  admirable  book,  in  which  the 
full  spirit  of  the  Reformation  breathes  out,  where,  beside 
the  moving  tenderness  of  the  Gospel,  and  the  manly  ac- 
cents of  the  Bible,  throb  the  profound  emotion,  the  grave 
eloquence,  the  noble-mindedness,  the  restrained  enthusiasm  of 
the  heroic  and  poetic  souls  who  had  rediscovered  Christianity, 
and  had  passed  near  the  fire  of  martyrdom.  *  Almighty  and 
most  merciful  Father,  we  have  erred  and  strayed  from  Thy 
ways  like  lost  sheep.  We  have  followed  too  much  the  de- 
vices and  desires  of  our  own  hearts.  We  have  offended  against 
Thy  holy  laws.  We  have  left  undone  those  things  which  we 
ought  to  have  done ;  and  we  have  done  those  things  which  we 
ought  not  to  have  done ;  and  there  is  no  health  in  us.  But 
Thou,  O  Lord,  have  mercy  upon  us,  miserable  offenders. 
Spare  Thou  them,  O  God,  which  confess  their  faults.  Restore 
Thou  them  that  are  penitent,  according  to  Thy  promises  de- 
clared unto  mankind  in  Christ  Jesus  our  Lord.  And  grant,  O 
most  merciful  Father,  for  His  sake,  that  we  may  hereafter  live 
a  godly,  righteous,  and  sober  life.'  *  Almighty  and  everlasting 
God,  who  hatest  nothing  that  Thou  hast  made,  and  dost  forgive 
the  sins  of  all  them  that  are  penitent,  create  and  make  in  us 
new  and  contrite  hearts,  that  we  worthily  lamenting  our  sins, 
and  acknowledging  our  wretchedness,  may  obtain  of  Thee,  the 
God  of  all  mercy,  perfect  remission  and  forgiveness.'  The 
same  idea  of  sin,  repentance,  and  moral  renovation  continually 
recurs  ;  the  master-thought  is  always  that  of  the  heart  humbled 
before  invisible  justice,  and  only  imploring  His  grace  in  order 
to  obtain  His  relief.  Such  a  state  of  mind  ennobles  man,  and 
introduces  a  sort  of  impassioned  gravity  in  all  the  important 
actions  of  his  life.  Listen  to  the  Liturgy  of  the  deathbed,  of 
Baptism,  of  marriage ;  the  latter  first :  *  Wilt  thou  have  this 
woman  to  thy  wedded  wife,  to  live  together  after  God's 
ordinance,  in  the  holy  estate  of  Matrimony?     Wilt  thou  love 

C.  A.-27 


\ 


1 1 


ii 


418 


AiTENDICteS. 


i'\ 


hmw,  comfort   her,  honor,  and   keep   her  in   sickness   and   in 
health ;  and,  forsaking  all  other,  keep  thee  only  unto  her,  so 
long  as  ye  both  shall  live?'     These  are  genuine,  honest,  and 
conscientious  words.     No  mystic  languor,  here  or  elsewhere. 
This  religion  is  not  made  for  women  who  dream,  yearn,  and 
sigh,  but^'for  men  who  examine  themselves,  act  and  have  confi- 
dence, confidence  in  some  one  more  just  than  themselves.  When 
a  man  is  sick,  and  his  flesh  is  weak,  the  Priest  comes  to  him, 
and  says :    '  Dearly  beloved,  know  this  that  Almighty  God  is 
the  Lord  of  life  and  death,  and  of  all  things  to  them  pertaining, 
as  youth,  strength,  health,  age,  weakness  and  sickness.    Where- 
fore, whatsoever  your  sickness  is,  know  you  certainly,  that  it 
is  God's  visitation.     And  for  what  cause  soever  this  sickness 
is  sent  unto  you ;  whether  it  be  to  try  your  patience  for  the 
example  of   others,  or  else   it   be  sent  unto   you  to  correct 
and  amend  in  you  whatsoever  doth  offend  the  eyes  of  your 
heavenly  Father  ;  know  you  certainly,  that  if  you  truly  repent 
von  of  yoftf  siiis,  and  bear  your  sickness  patiently,  trusting 
ill  Cbd's  mercy,  submitting  yourself  wholly  unto  His  will, 
it   shall   turn  to   your  profit,    and    help  you  forward   in  the 
right  way  that  leadeth  unto  everlasting  life.'      A  great  mys- 
terious  sentiment,    a   sort   of  sublime    epic,  void  of   images, 
shows  darkly  amid  these  probings  of  the  conscience ;  I  mean 
a  glimpse  of  the  Divine  government  and  of  the  invisible  world, 
the  only  existences,  the  only  realities,  in  spite  of  bodily  ap- 
pearances and  of  the  brute  chance,  which  seems  to  jumble  all 
things  together.     Man  sees  this  beyond  at  distant  intervals, 
and  raises  himself  out  of  his  mire,  as  though  he  had  suddenly 
breathed  a  pure  and  strengthening  atmosphere." 

The  "North  British  Review,"  a  Scottish  Presbyterian 
periodical,  contained  an  article  some  time  ago  from  which  this 
is  quoted  :  "  The  Liturgy  is  the  choicest  selection  of  what  has 
proved  to  be  best  during  a  long  lapse  of  time.  Its  Litanies 
and  its  Collects  are  the  fruit  of  the  most  sublime  piety,  and 
the  noblest  gifts  of  language,  tested  by  long  sustained  trial. 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


419 


No  single  generation  could  have  created,  or  could  replace  the 
Liturgy.  It  is  the  accumulation  of  the  treasures  with  which 
the  most  diversified  experience,  the  most  fervent  devotion, 
and  the  most  exalted  genius,  have  enriched  the  worship  of 
prayer  and  praise  during  fifteen  hundred  years.  Who,  then, 
can  overestimate  its  influence  in  perpetuating  the  sacred  fire 
of  Christian  love  and  Christian  faith  among  a  whole  people,  or 
exaggerate  its  power  in  conserving  the  pure  and  Apostolic 
type  of  Christian  worship." 

Dr.  Doddridge,  an  English  Independent  divine  and  ex- 
positor says  of  the  Prayer  Book  :  "  The  language  is  so  plain 
as  to  be  level  to  the  capacity  of  the  meanest,  and  yet  the 
sense    is   so   noble  as  to  raise    the  capacity  of    the  highest." 

Rev.  Albert  Barnes,  the  great  commentator  among  American 
Presbyterians,  says  :  "  We  have  always  thought  that  there  are 
Christian  minds  and  hearts  that  would  find  more  edification 
in  the  forms  of  worship  in  that  Church  than  in  any  other. 
We  have  never  doubted  that  many  of  the  purest  flames  of 
devotion  that  rise  from  the  earth,  ascend  from  the  Altars  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  and  that  many  of  the  purest  spirits  that  the 
earth  contains,  minister  at  those  Altars  and  breathe  forth  their 
prayers  and  praises  in  language  consecrated  by  the  use  of 
piety  for  centuries." 

Another  Presbyterian,  Professor  Shields,  of  Princeton 
TJniversity,  writes :  "  The  English  Liturgy,  next  to  the  Eng- 
lish Bible,  is  the  most  wonderful  product  of  the  Reformation. 
The  very  fortunes  of  the  book  are  the  romance  of  history. 
As  we  trace  its  development,  its  rubrics  seem  dyed  in  the 
blood  of  martyrs ;  its  offices  echo  with  polemic  phrases  ; 
its  canticles  mingle  with  the  battle-cries  of  armed  sects  and 
factions ;  and  its  successive  revisions  mark  the  career  of  dy- 
nasties, states  and  Churches.  Cavalier,  Covenanter  and  Pur- 
itan have  crossed  their  swords  over  it  ;  scholars  and  soldiers, 
statesmen  and  Churchmen,  kings  and  commoners,  lipve  united 
in   defending   it.      England,    Germany,    Geneva,    Scotland, 


rnl  'i 


.11  ll 


I  ill 


APPENDICES. 

America,  have,  by  turns,  been  the  scene  of  its  conflicts.     Far 
beyond  the  little  island  which  was  its  birthplace,  its  influence 
has  been  silently  spreading  in  connection  with  great  political 
and  religious  changes,  generation  after  generation,  from  land 
to  land,  even  where  its  name  was  never  heard.     At  first  sight, 
indeed,  the  importance  which   this   book   has  acquired,  may 
seem  quite  beyond  its  merits,  as  the  Bible  itself  might  appear, 
lo  a  superficial  observer,  a  mere  idol  of  bigotry  and  prejudice. 
But  the  explanation  is  in  both  cases  somewhat  the  same.     It 
is  to  be  found  in  the  fact  that  the  Prayer  Book,  like  the  Sacred 
Caoon,  is  no  merely  individual  production,  nor  even  purely 
liuman  work,  but  an  accumulation  of  choice  writings,  partly 
Divine,  partly  human,  expressing  the  religious  mind  of  the 
whole  ancient  and  modern  world,  as  enunciated  by  Prophets 
and  Apostles,  Saints  and  Martyrs,  and  formulated  by  councils, 
synods  and  conferences,  all  seeking  heavenly  light  and  guid- 
ance.    Judaism  has  given  to  it  its  Lessons  and  Psalter ;  Chris- 
tianity has  added  its  Epistles  and  Gospels ;  Catholicism  has 
followed  with  its  Canticles,  Creeds  and  Collects  ;  and  Protes- 
tantism has  completed  it  with  its  Exhortations,  Confessions  and 
Thankscrivings.     At  the  same  time,  each  leading  phase  of  the 
Keformation  has  been  impressed  upon  its  composite  materials. 
Lutheranism  has  molded  its  Ritual ;  Calvinism  has  framed  its 
Doctrine ;    Episcopalianism   has  dominated    both   Ritual    and 
Doctrine ;  whilst  Presbyterianism  has  subjected  each  to  thor- 
ough revision.     And  the  whole  has  been   rendered  into  the 
pure    Enirlish  and   with   the    sacred   fervor    peculiar   to    the 
earnest  age  in  which  it  arose  ;  has  been  wrought  into  a  system 
adapted  to  all  classes  of  men,  through  all  the  vicissitudes  of 
life,  and  has  been  tested   and  hallowed  by  three  centunes  of 
trial  in  every  quarter  of  the  globe.     It  would  be  strange  if  a 
work  which  thus  has  its  roots  in  the  whole  Church  of  the  past, 
should  not  be  sending  forth  its  branches  into  the  whole  Church 
of  the   future ;  and  anyone  who  will  take  the  pains  to  study 
iip  present  adaptations,  whatever  may  have  been  his  preju- 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


421 


dices,  must  admit  that  there  is  no  other  extant  formulary 
which  is  so  well  fitted  to  become  the  rallying- point  and  stand- 
ard of  modern  Christendom.  In  it  are  to  be  found  the  means, 
possibly  the  germs,  of  a  just  reorganization  of  Protestantism, 
as  well  as  an  ultimate  reconciliation  with  the  true  Catholicism, 
such  a  Catholicism  as  shall  have  shed  everything  sectarian  and 
national,  and  retained  only  what  is  common  to  the  whole 
Church  of  Christ  in  alt  ages  and  countries.  Whilst  to  the 
true  Protestant  it  offers  Evangelical  doctrine,  worship  and 
unity,  on  the  terms  of  the  Reformation,  it  still  preserves,  for 
the  true  Catholic,  the  choicest  formulas  of  antiquity,  and  to 
all  Christians  of  every  name  opens  a  liturgical  system  at  once 
Scriptural  and  reasonable,  doctrinal  and  devotional,  learned 
and  vernacular,  artistic  and  spiritual.  It  is  not  too  much  to 
say  that  were  the  problem  given,  to  frame  out  of  the  imper- 
fectly organized  and  sectarian  Christianity  of  our  times  a 
liturgical  model  for  the  Communion  of  Saints  in  the  one  uni- 
versal Church,  the  result  might  be  expressed  in  some  such 
compilation  as  the  English  Book  of  Common  Prayer." 

Some  of  the  Methodists  pronounced  the  Prayer  Book  Serv- 
ices to  be  "chaff"  and  so  incapable  of  sustaining  spiritual 
life.  These  received  this  contradiction  and  rebuke  from  John 
Wesley:  "The  prayers  of  the  Church  are  not  'chaff ;'  they  are 
substantial  food  for  any  who  are  alive  unto  God."  In  his  pref- 
ace to  the  "  Sunday  Service  for  the  Methodists  in  America " 
which  is  simply  an  abridgment  of  the  Prayer  Book  for  con- 
venient use  in  missionary  fields,  he  says :  "  I  believe  there  is 
no  Liturgy  in  the  world,  either  in  ancient  or  modern  language, 
which  breathes  more  of  solid,  spiritual,  rational  piety  than  the 
Common  Prayer  of  the  Church  of  England."  Elsewhere  he 
says  :  "  I  hold  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England.  I 
love  her  Liturgy." 

Dr.  Adam  Clarke,  the  most  learned  commentator  among 
Wesley's  followers,  says  :  "  It  is  the  greatest  effort  of  the  Re- 
formation, next  to  the  translation  of  the  Scriptures  into  the 


%^ 


422 


APPENDICES. 


English  language.  As  a  foTm  of  devotion  it  has  no  equal  in 
any  part  of  the  Universal  Church  of  God.  It  is  founded  on 
those  doctrines  which  contain  the  sum  and  essence  of  Chris- 
tianity, and  speaks  the  language  of  the  sublimest  piety,  and  of 
the  most  refined  devotional  feeling.  Next  to  the  Bible  it  is 
the  book  of  my  understanding  and  of  my  heart." 

Dr.  Watson,  another  choice  spirit  of  Methodism,  the  well-  . 
known  author  of  the  Theological  Institutes,  said  :  "  Such  a 
Liturgy  makes  the  Service  of  God's  house  appear  more  like  the 
business  of  the  Loid's  Day  ;  and  besides  the  aid  it  affords  to  the 
most  devout  and  spiritual,  a  great  body  of  Evangelical  truth 
is,  by  constant  use,  laid  up  in  the  minds  of  children  and  igno- 
rant people  who,  when  at  length  they  begin  to  pray  under  a 
religious  concern,  are  already  furnished  with  suitable,  sancti- 
fying, solemn  and  impressive  petitions.  Persons  well  ac- 
quainted with  the  Liturgy  are  certainly  in  a  state  of  important 
preparation  for  the  labors  of  a  preachei%^d  their  piety 
often  takes  a  richer  and  more  sober  char^^r  from  that  cir- 
cumstance." 

Robert  Hall,  ope  of  tie  Brightest  lights  that  ever  shone 
among  the  Baptists,  and  one  that  would  have  been  bright  in 
any  firmament,  confesses  that  "  the  Evangelical  purity  of  the 
Prayer  Book,  the  chastened  fervor  of  its  devotions,  and  the 
majestic  simplicity  of  its  language,  have  combined  to  place 
it  in  the  very  first  rank  of  uninspired  compositions." 

The  following  is  from  the  memoirs  of  the  learned  Congre- 
gationalist,  Professor  Phelps  :  "  The  Liturgy  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  has  become  very  precious  to  me.  The  depth  of  its 
meaning,  it  seems  to  me,  nobody  can  fathom  who  has  not  ex- 
perienced some  great  sorrow.  We  have  lost  much  in  parting 
with  the  prayers  of  the  old  Mother  Church  ;  and  what  have  we 
gained  in  their  place?  I  do  not  feel  in  extemporaneous  prayer 
the  deep  undertone  of  devotion  which  rings  out  from  the  old 
Collects  of  the  Church  like  the  sound  of  ancient  bells.  I  longed 
for,  and  prayed  for,  and  worst  of  all,  waited  for,  some  sublime 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


423 


and  revolutionary  change  of  heart ;  and  what  that  was,  as  a 
fact  on  a  child's  experience,  I  have  not  the  remotest  idea.  If 
I  had  been  trained  in  the  Episcopal  Church,  I  should  at  the 
time  have  been  confirmed,  and  entered  upon  a  consciously 
religious  life,  and  grown  up  into  Christian  living  of  the  Epis- 
copal type."  ,>^ 

This  is  the  te5^lm)ny  of  another  gifted  Congregation- 
alist  of  this  couj^Kffy,  the  Rev.  Thomas  K.  Beecher :  "  The  Epis- 
copal Churpb  offers  for  our  use  the  most  venerable  Liturgy  in 
the  English  tongue.  The  devotional  treasures  of  the  Roman 
Catholic  Church  are  embalmed  and  buried  in  Latin.  But  in 
English  there  are  no  Lessons,  Gospels,  Psalms,  Collects,  Con- 
fessions, Thanksgivings,  Prayers — in  one  word,  no  religious 
form  book  that  can  stand  a  njoment  in  comparison  with  the 
Prayer  Book  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  the  two-fold  quality 
of  richness  and  age.  The  proper  name,  because  truly  descrip- 
tive, for  this  Church  would  be  the  Church  of  the  Prayer  Book. 
As  is  the  way  with  all  other  Churches,  so  here,  the  Church 
champions  and  leaders  have  many  wise  things  to  say  about  the 
Church  and  her  prerogative.  But  the  pious  multitudes  that 
frequent  her  courts  are  drawn  thither  mostly  by  love  of  the 
prayers  and  praises,  the  Litanies  and  Lessons  of  the  Prayer 
Book.  And,  brethren  of  every  name,  I  certify  that  you  rarely 
hear  in  any  Church  a  prayer  spoken  in  English  that  is  not  in- 
debted to  the  Prayer  Book  for  some  of  its  choicest  periods. 
And  further,  I  doubt  whether  life  has  in  store  for  any  of  you 
an  uplift  so  high,  or  downfall  so  deep,  but  that  you  can  find 
company  for  your  soul  and  fitting  words  for  your  lips  among 
the  treasures  of  this  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  '  In  all  time 
of  our  tribulation ;  in  all  time  of  our  prosperity;  in  the  hour  of 
death  and  in  the  day  of  judgment.  Good  Lord  deliver  us.' 
No  transient  observer  can  adequately  value  this  treasure  of  a 
birthright  Churchman ;  to  be  using  to-day  the  self-same 
words  that  have  through  the  centuries  declared  the  faith,  or 
made  known  the  prayer,  of  that  mighty  multitude,  who,  *  being 


' 


ii 


mi 


t;,[l 


424 


APPENDICES. 


It 


•il 


now  delivered  from  the  burden  of  flesh,  are  in  joy  and  felicity;' 
to  be  baptized  in  early  infancy  and  never  to  know  a  time 
when  we  were  not  recognized  and  welcome  among  the  mil- 
lions who  have  entered  by  the  same  door ;  to  be  confirmed  in 
due  time  in  a  faith  that  has  sustained  a  noble  army  of  con- 
fessors, approving  its  worth  through  persecutions  and  pros- 
perities, a  strength  to  the  tried  and  a  chastening  to  the 
worldly-minded ;  to  be  married  by  an  authority  before  which 
kings  and  peasants  bow  alike,  asking  benediction  upon  the 
covenant  that,  without  respect  of  persons,  binds  by  the  same 
words  of  duty  the  highest  and  the  lowest ;  to  bring  our  new- 
born children  as  we  were  brought,  to  begin  where  we  began, 
and  to  grow  up  to  fill  our  places ;  to  die  in  the  faith,  and  al- 
most hear  the  Gospel  words  soon  to  be  spoken  over  one's  own 
grave  as  over  the  thousand  times  ten  thousand  of  those  who 
have  slept  in  Jesus.  In  short,  to  be  a  devout  and  consistent 
Churchman,  brings  a  man  through  aisles  fragrant  with  holy 
association,  and  accompanied  by  a  long  procession  of  the  good, 
chanting,  as  they  march,  a  unison  of  piety  and  hope  until  they 
come  to  the  holy  place  where  shining  Saints  sing  the  new  song 
of  the  redeemed.     And  they  sing  with  them." 

The  distinguished  brother  of  the  author  of  the  above 
eulogium,  Henry  Ward  Beecher,  was  quite  as  enthusiastic  in 
his  praise  of  our  form  of  worship.  He  wrote  thus  in  a  letter 
from  Scotland  after  attending  a  Church  Service  :  "  The  serv- 
ices began.  You  know  my  mother  was,  until  her  marriage, 
in  the  Communion  of  the  Episcopal  Church.  This  thought 
hardly  left  me,  while  I  sat,  grateful  for  the  privilege  of  wor- 
shipping God  through  a  Service  that  had  expressed  so  often 
her  devotions.  I  cannot  tell  you  how  much  I  was  affected. 
I  had  never  had  such  a  trance  of  worship,  and  I  shall  never 
have  such  another  view  until  I  gain  the  gate.  I  am  so 
ignorant  of  the  Church  Service  that  I  cannot  tell  the  various 
parts  by  their  right  names  ;  but  the  parts  which  most  affected 
me  were  the  prayers  and  responses  which  the  choir  sang.     I 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


425 


had  never  heard  any  part  of  a  supplication  —  a  direct  prayer 
sung  by  a  choir  —  and  it  seemed  as  though  I  heard  not 
with  my  ear,  but  with  my  soul.  I  was  dissolved,  my  whole 
being  seemed  to  me  like  an  incense  wafted  gratefully  towards 
God.  The  Divine  Presence  rose  before  me  in  wondrous 
majesty,  but  of  ineffable  gentleness  and  goodness.  Through- 
out the  Service,  and  it  was  an  hour  and  a  quarter  long, 
whenever  an  Amen  occurred,  it  was  given  by  the  choir, 
accompanied  by  the  organ  and  the  congregation.  Oh,  that 
swell  and  solemn  cadence  yet  rings  in  my  ear.  Not  once, 
not  a  single  time,  did  it  occur  in  that  Service  without  bringing 
tears  from  my  eyes.  I  stood  like  a  shrub  in  a  spring  morning, 
every  leaf  covered  with  dew,  and  every  breeze  shook  down 
some  drops.  I  trembled  so  much  at  times,  that  I  was  obliged 
to  sit  down.  Oh,  when  in  the  prayers,  breathed  forth  in  strains 
of  sweet,  simple,  solemn  music,  the  love  of  Christ  was  recog- 
nized, how  I  longed  then  to  give  utterance  to  what  that  love 
seemed  to  me.  There  was  a  moment  in  which  the  heavens 
seemed  opened  to  me,  and  I  saw  the  glory  of  God  !  All  the 
earth  seemed  to  me  a  storehouse  of  images,  made  to  set  forth 
the  Redeemer,  and  I  could  scarcely  keep  still  from  crying 
out."  No  wonder  that  Mr.  Beecher  before  his  death  ar- 
ranged with  an  Ej)iscopal  Clergyman  to  oflSciate  at  his  funeral, 
using  the  Church's  Burial  Service.  The  marvel  is  that  both 
he  and  his  scarcely  less  brilliant  brother  did  not,  like  therr 
sister,  Harriet  Beecher  Stowe,  find  their  way  back  to  the 
Church  of  their  maternal  ancestors. 

Want  of  space  compels  us  to  conclude  these  quotations 
with  an  extract  from  one  of  Mr.  Edmund  Clarence  Stedman's 
lectures  on  Poetry,  delivered  at  Johns  Hopkins  University  and 
published  in  the  "  Century  Magazine."  Mr.  Stedman  stands  in 
the  front  rank  of  living  poets  and  critics.  He  is  not  a  mem- 
ber of  the  Church,  but  few  if  any  of  her  sons  have  a  higher 
appreciation  of  her  worship  than  he,  and  I  know  of  none  who 
have  spoken  more  eloquently  of  it.     "  Let  me  refer,"  says  he, 


It 


i 


ill! 


!  I 


«**o  a  single  illtistTBlifiii  of  the  creative  faith  of  the  poet.     For 
centuries  all  that  was  great  in  the  art  and  poetry  of  Christen- 
dom grew  out  of  that  faith.    What  seems  to  me  its  most  poetic, 
as  ivell  as  the  most  enduring,  written  product  is  not,  as  you 
migllt  suppose,  the  masterpiece  of  a  single  mind — the  '  Divina 
Comedia,'   for   instance — but  the    outcome  of   centuries,  the 
expression  of  many  human  souls,  even  of  various  peoples  and 
races.     Upon  its  literary  and  constructive  side  I  regard  the 
venerable  Liturgy  of  the  historic  Christian  Church  as  one  of 
Hie  few  worid-poems,  the  poems  universal.     I  care  not  which 
of  the  Rituals  you  follow,  the  Oriental,  the  Alexandrian,  the 
Latin,  or  the    Anglican.     The    latter,    that   of  an  Episcopal 
Prayer  Book,  is  a  version  familiar  to  you  of  what  seems  to  me 
the  most  wonderful  symphonic  idealization  of  human  faith  — 
certainly  the  most  inclusive,  blending  in  harmonic  succession 
all    the   cries   and   longings  and  laudations  of  the  universal 
human  heart  invoking  a  Paternal  Creator.     I  am  riot  here  con- 
sidering this  Liturgy  as  Divine,  though  much  of  it  is  derived 
from  what  multitudes  accept  for  revelation.     I  have  in  mind 
its  human  quality ;  the  mystic  tide  of  human  hope,  imagina- 
tion, prayer,  sorrows,  and  passionate  expression,  upon  which 
it  bears  the  worshipper  along,  and  wherewith  it  has  sustained 
men's  souls  with  conceptions  of  duty  and  immortality  through- 
out  hundreds,    yes,    thousands   of    undoubting   years.      The 
Orient  and  the  Occident  have  enriched  it  with  their  finest  and 
itrongest   utterances,   have   worked    it  over   and  over,  have 
itricken  from  it  what  was  against  the  consistency  of  its  import 
and  beauty.     It  has  been  a  growth,  an  exhalation,  an  apoc- 
alyptic cloud  'arisen  with   the   prayers   of  the  Saints,'  from 
climes  of  the  Hebrew,  the  Greek,  the  Roman,  the  Goth,  to 
spread  in  time  over  half  the  world.     It  is  the  voice  of  human 
brotherhood,    the   blended   voice   of  rich   and  poor,  old  and 
young,  the  wise  and  simple.     This  being  its  nature,  and  as 
the  crowning  masterpiece  of  faith,  you  find  that  in  various  and 
constructive  beauty — as  a  work  of  poetic  art — it  is  unparal- 


NON-EPISCOPALIAN    ENCOMIUMS. 


427 


leled.  It  is  lyrical  from  first  to  last  with  perfect  harmonious 
forms  of  human  speech.  Its  chants  and  anthems,  its  songs 
of  praise  and  hope  and  sorrow  have  allied  to  themselves 
impressive  music  from  the  originative  and  immemorial  past, 
and  the  enthralling  strains  of  its  inheritors.  Its  prayers  are 
not  only  *  for  all  sorts  and  conditions  of  men,'  but  for  every 

stress   of   life  which  mankind  must  feel  in  common in  the 

household,  or  isolated,  or  in  tribal  or  national  effort,  and  in 
calamity  and  repentance  and  thanksgiving.  Its  wisdom  is 
forever  old  and  perpetually  new ;  its  calendar  celebrates  all 
seasons  of  the  rolling  year;  its  narrative  is  of  the  sim])lest, 
the  most  pathetic,  the  most  rapturous,  and  most  ennobliiiir 
life  the  world  has  known.  There  is  no  malefactor  so  wretched, 
no  just  man  so  perfect,  as  not  to  find  his  hope,  his  consolation, 
his  lesson  in  this  poem  of  poems.  I  have  called  it  lyrical ;  it 
is  dramatic  in  structure  and  effect ;  it  is  an  epic  of  the  age  of 
faith  ;  but,  in  fact,  as  a  piece  of  inclusive  literature,  it  has  no 
counterpart,  and  can   have  no  successor." 


But  it  may  be  asked,  if  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer  con- 
tains a  form  of  worship  so  superior  to  the  extempore  use 
which  prevails  with  Protestants,  how  is  it  that  this  superiority 
is  appreciated  by  comparatively  so  few  among  us?  We 
answer  this  question  by  asking  another.  Why  is  it  that  in 
the  world  of  art  the  vast  majority  are  not  able  to  distinguish 
the  inferior  from  the  superior,  and  in  nine  cases  out  of  ten 
prefer  a  trifling  ditty  to  an  oratorio,  a  daub  to  a  masterpiece, 
or  a  doggerel  to  a  poem?  It  is  simply  because  their  educa- 
tion is  deficient. 

"  There  must  be,  in  ordinary  circumstances,"  writes  one 
who  came  to  the  Episcopal  Church  from  Presbyterianism, 
"  not  only  a  taste,  but  an  educated  and  cultivated  taste,  to 
appreciate  beauty  in  a  landscape,  grace  in  a  statue,  refinement 
in  manners,  elegance  in  literature,  force  in  eloquence,  melody 


428 


APPENDICES. 


in  music,  purity  in  morals,  and,  to  come  to  the  point  in  hand, 
perfection  in  worship.  Time,  or  opportunity,  at  least,  must  be 
allowed  to  correct  and  adapt  the  taste.  It  is  impossible  to 
rise  at  a  bound  from  the  impression  that  the  sermon  is  the 
summnm  bomim  for  which  we  turn  our  feet  towards  the 
sanctuary,  into  the  feeling — not  new,  I  apprehend,  to  the 
heart  of  the  veriest  worldling  among  the  Episcopalians  —  that 
when  we  '  go  within  thy  gates,  O  Zion,'  it  is  to  worship  God. 
It  is  not  possible,  from  the  heavy,  dull  commonplaces  of  an 
extemporaneous  prayer,  which  it  is  enough  to  have  heard  once, 
to  rise,  by  a  single  effort,  to  the  dignity  of  a  Liturgy,  which, 
to  be  adequately  admired,  must  be  heard  a  thousand  times. 
It  is  impossible  to  settle  down,  from  the  fitful,  feverish  and 
momentary  flights  of  the  revival  and  the  camp-ground  into 
the    chastened     and     life -long    fervor   of     the    incomparable 

Liturgy." 

Moreover,  but  for  inherited  prejudices,  many  would  recog- 
nize the  superiority  and  appreciate  the  beauties  of  the  Prayer 
Book,  who  now  inveigh  against  it.  A  curious  illustration  of 
the  force  of  prejudice  is  related  of  the  parishioners  of  the 
famous  Bishop  Bull,  who,  during  the  Commonwealth,  when 
the  use  of  the  Liturgy  was  prohibited,  committed  to  memory 
the  various  Services  of  the  Prayer  Book,  and  made  them  the 
channel  of  the  public  devotions  of  the  people  in  the  parish  of 
which  he  was  then  minister.  "  The  consequence  of  which  was," 
says  the  biographer;  "that  they  who  were  most  prejudiced 
against  the  Liturgy  did  not  scruple  to  commend  Bishop  Bull 
as  a  person  that  prayed  by  the  Spirit,  though  at  the  same  time 
they  railed  at  the  Common  Prayer  as  a  beggarly  element,  and 
as  a  carnal  performance." 


IX. 


JOHN  WESLEY  ALWAYS  AN  EPISCOPALIAN. 

Lecture  VII;  Page  205. 

TN  order  to  feel  the  force  of  the  following  quotations  from 
'*"  Mr.  Wesley's  works,  it  will  be  necessary  to  bear  in  mind 
that  he  was  born  in  the  year  1703  and  that  he  died  a.  d.  1791, 
at  the  extreme  old  age  of  88  years.  The  extracts  from  his 
writings  cover  the  latter  half  of  his  life,  the  first  being  passed 
over  because  it  is  never  claimed  that  he  was  anything  except 
a  Churchman  during  the  earlier  part  of  his  career. 

1746  :  "  I  dare  not  renounce  Communion  with  the  Church 
of  England.  As  a  minister  I  teach  her  doctrines  ;  I  use  her 
offices  ;  I  conform  to  her  Rubrics  ;  I  suffer  reproach  for  my 
attachment  to  her.  As  a  private  member,  I  hold  her  doctrines; 
I  join  in  her  offices,  in  prayer,  in  hearing,  in  communicat- 
ing."    Vol.  VIII,  p.  444. 

1747  :  "  We  continually  exhort  all  who  attend  on  our 
preaching,  to  attend  the  offices  of  the  Church.  And  they  do 
pay  a  more  regular  attendance  there  than  they  ever  did  be- 
fore."    Vol.  VIII,  p.  488. 

1755:  "We  began  reading  together  —  *A  Gentleman's 
Reasons  for  His  Dissent  from  the  Church  of  England.'  It  is 
an  elaborate  and  lively  tract,  and  contains  the  strength  of  the 
cause  ;  but  it  did  not  yield  us  one  proof  that  it  is  lawful  for  us, 
much  less  our  duty,  to  separate  from  it."     Vol.  II,  p.  328. 

1758  :  In  this  year  Mr.  Wesley  wrote  his  "  Reasons  Against 
a  Separation  from  the  Church  of  England ; "  and  in  writing  to 
Miss  Bishop  in  1778,  he  says  :  "  These  reasons  were  never  yet 
answered  and  I  believe  they  never  will."  The  Rev.  Charles 
Wesley  says  of  this  tract :  "  I  think  myself  bound  in  duty  to  add 
my  testimony  to  my  brother's.  His  twelve  reasons  against 
our  ever  separating  from  the  Church  of  England  are  mine  also. 
I  subscribe  to  them  with  all  my  heart.    My  affection  for  the 

(429) 


I 


430 


APPENDICES. 


JOHK    WESLEY    ALWAYS    AN    EPISCOPALIAN. 


431 


ii 


t:!|i' 


Church  is  as  strong  as  ever ;  and  I  clearly  see  my  calling,  which 
is  to  live  and  die  in  her  Communion.  This,  therefore,  I  am  de- 
termined to  do,  the  Lord  being  my  helper."  Vol.  XIII,  p.  199. 

1759 :  "  I  received  much  comfort  at  the  old  Church  in  the 
morning,  and  at  St.  Thomas'  in  the  afternoon.  It  was  as  if 
both  the  sermons  were  made  for  me.  I  pity  those  who  can 
find  no  good  at  Clmrch  !  But  how  should  they,  if  prejudice 
come  between  them?  An  effectual  bar  to  the  Grace  of  God." 
Vol.  II,  p.  478.  "I  had  appointed  to  preach  at  seven  in  the 
evening  at  Bradford,  but  when  I  came,  I  found  Mr.  Hart  was 
to  preach  at  six,  so  I  delayed  till  the  Church  Service  was 
ended,  that  there  might  not  appear  on  my  part,  at  least,  even 
the  shadow  of  opposition  between  us."     Vol.  II,  p.  516. 

1761  :  "  We  had  a  long  stage  from  hence  to  Swadale,  where 
I  found  an  earnest,  loving,  simple  [)eople,  whom  I  likewise  ex- 
horted not  to  leave  the  Church,  though  they  had  not  the  best 
of  ministers."     Vol.  Ill,  p.  61. 

1763:  "I  then  related  what  I  had  done  since  I  came  to 
Norwich  first,  and  what  I  would  do  for  the  time  to  come,  par- 
ticularly that  I  would  immediately  put  a  stop  to  preaching  in 
the  time  of  Church  Service."     Vol.  Ill,  p.  152. 

1766 :  "  I  see  clearer  and  clearer  none  will  keep  to  us, 
unless  they  keep  to  the  Church.  Whoever  separates  from  the 
Church  separates  from  the  Methodists."     Vol.  Ill,  p.  260. 

1767:  "I  rode  to  Yarmouth,  and  found  the  Society,  after 

the  example  of  Mr.  W p,  had  entirely  left  the  Church.     I 

judged  it  needful  to  speak  largely  upon  that  head.  They 
stood  reproved,  and  resolved,  one  and  all,  to  go  to  it  again." 
Vol.  Ill,  p.  272. 

1768 :  "  I  advise  all,  over  whom  I  have  any  influence, 
steadily  to  keep  to  the  Church."     Vol.  Ill,  p.  337. 

1770  :  ••  We  liad  a  poor  sermon  at  Church.  However,  I 
went  again  in  the  afternoon,  remembering  the  words  of  Mr. 
Philip  Henry:  '  If  the  preacher  does  not  know  his  duty,  I  bless 
God  that  I  know  mine.'  "     Vol.  Ill,  p.  401. 

1772  :  "  I  attended  the  Church  of  England  Service  in  the 
morning,  and  that  of  the  Kirk  in  the  afternoon.  Truly,  *  no 
man  having  drunk  old  wine,  ^raightway  desireth  new.'  How 
dull  and  dry  the  latter  appeared  to  me,  who  had  been  accus- 
tomed to  the  former."     Vol.  Ill,  p.  463. 


Ill 


1775  :  "Understanding  that  almost  all  the  Methodists,  by 

the   advice   of   Mr.  ,    had    left   the    Church,  I  earnestly 

exhorted  them  to  return  to  it."     Vol.  IV,  p.  64. 

1777:  "They,  the  Methodists,  have  read  the  writings  of 
the  most  eminent  pleaders  for  separation,  both  in  the  last  and 
present  century.  They  have  spent  several  days  in  a  General 
Conference  upon  this  very  question  :  'Is  it  expedient,  sup- 
posing, not  granting,  that  it  is  lawful,  to  separate  from  the 
Established  Church*?'  But  still  they  could  see  no  sufficient 
cause  to  depart  from  their  first  resolution.  So  that  their  fixed 
purpose  is,  let  the  Clergy  or  Laity  use  them  well  or  ill,  by  the 
grace  of  God,  to  endure  all  things,  to  hold  on  their  even 
course."     Vol.  VII,  p.  428. 

1778:  "The  original  Methodists  were  all  of  the  Church  of 
England,  and  the  more  awakened  they  were,  the  more  zeal- 
ously they  adhered  to  it  in  every  point,  both  of  doctrine  and 
discipline.  Hence  we  inserted  in  the  very  first  Rules  of  our 
Society:  *They  that  leave  the  Church  leave  us.'  And  this  we 
did,  not  as  a  point  of  prudence,  but  a  point  of  conscience." 
Vol.  XIII,  p.  134.  "I  believe  one  reason  why  God  is  pleased 
to  continue  my  life  so  long  is,  to  confirm  them  in  their  present 
purpose,  not  to  separate  from  the  Church."  Vol.  VII,  p.  278. 
"I  dare  not  separate  from  the  Church;  I  believe  it  would  be 
a  sin  so  to  do;  I  have  been  true  to  my  profession  from  1730  to 
this  day."     Vol.  VII,  p.  279. 

1785:  "Finding  that  a  report  had  been  spread  abroad  that 
I  was  just  going  to  leave  the  Church,  to  satisfy  those  that 
were  grieved  concerning  it,  I  openly  declared  in  the  even- 
ing that  I  had  now  no  more  thought  of  sejiarating  from  the 
Church,  than  I  had  forty  years  ago."     Vol.  IV,  p.  320. 

1786:  "Whenever  there  is  any  Church  Service,  I  do  not 
approve  of  any  appointment  the  same  hour;  because  I  love  the 
Church  of  England,  and  would  assist,  not  oppose  it,  all  I  can." 
Vol.  XIII,  p.  55.  [This  is  taken  from  a  letter  to  the  Rev.  Free- 
born Garretson,  of  the  Methodist  Society  in  America,  and 
clearly  shows  that  in  no  instance  did  he  suffer  anything  to  be 
done  to  oppose  the  Church  of  England,  whether  in  the  States 
or  at  home.] 

1787  :  "  I  went  over  to  Deptford,  but  it  seemed  I  was  got 
into  a  den  of  lions.  '  Most  of  the  leading  men  of  the  Society 
were  mad  for  separating  from  the  Church.     I  endeavored  to 


432 


APPENDICES. 


I  , 


reason  with  tbem,  but  in  vain  ;  they  had  neither  sense  nor  even 
good  manners  left.  At  length,  after  meeting  the  whole  So- 
ciety, I  told  them  :  *If  you  are  resolved  you  may  have  your 
service  in  Church  hours ;  but  remember,  from  that  time  you 
will  see  my  face  no  more.'  This  struck  deep,  and  from  that 
hour  I  have  heard  no  more  of  separating  from  the  Church." 
Vol.  IV,  p.  357.  "Few  of  them,  those  who  separated,  as- 
signed the  unholiness  of  either  the  Clergy  or  Laity  as  the  cause 
of  their  separation.  And  if  any  did  so,  it  did  not  appear  that 
they  themselves  were  a  jot  better  than  those  they  separated 
from."    Vol.  VII,  p..  183. 

1788:  "This  is  the  peculiar  glory  of  the  people  called 
Methodists.  In  spite  of  all  manner  of  temptations,  they  will 
not  separate  from  the  Church.  What  many  so  earnestly  covet, 
they  abhor.  They  will  not  be  a  distinct  body."  Vol.  XIII, 
p.  232. 

1789 :  "  Unless  I  see  more  reasons  for  it  than  I  ever  yet 
saw,  I  will  never  leave  the  Church  of  England,  as  by  law 
established,  while  the  breath  of  God  is  in  my  nostrils."  Vol. 
XIII,  p.  238.  In  this  year,  two  before  his  death,  Mr.  Wesley 
wrote  "Seven  more  reasons  against  separating  from  the 
Church." 

1790:  "I  have  been  uniform,  both  in  doctrine  and  disci- 
pline, for  above  these  fifty  years,  and  it  is  a  little  too  late  for 
me  to  turn  into  a  new  path,  now  I  am  gray-headed."  Vol. 
XII,  p.  439.  "  The  Methodists  in  general  are  members  of  the 
Church  of  England.  They  hold  all  her  Doctrines,  attend  her 
Services,  and  partake  of  her  Sacraments."     Vol.  XIII,  p.  119. 


POPE  PIUS  IV.  AND  THE  ENGLISH  PRAYER  BOOK. 

Lecture  II ;  Page  130. 

A  N  interesting  letter  upon  this  subject,  from  Dr.  W.  D. 
'*^*'  Wilson,  has  recently  appeared  in  the  New  York  Church- 
man, under  the  heading,  "  The  Pope  and  the  English  Liturgy: 
A  New  Confirmation  of  the  story."  It  is  substantially  as  fol- 
lows :  In  A.  D.  1568-70,  the  Pope  offered  to  accept  the  English 


POPE    PIUS    IV.    AND    THE    ENGLISH    PRAYER    BOOK.        433 

Liturgy,  and  allow  it  to  be  used  in  England,  if  only  Elizabeth 
would  acknowledge  that  she  had  received  it  from  him,  and 
used  it  with  his  consent  and  in  subordination  to  his  authority. 
This  story  is  commonly  repeated  as  resting  on  the  authority  of 
Lord  Coke,  who  is  reported  to  have  said  that  he  had  seen  the 
letter.     But  Coke  does  not  say,  in  his  charge  at  Norwich,  that 
he  had   seen  it.     What  he  does  say  is  :  "I  have   oftentimes 
heard  it  avowed  by  the  late  Queen,  in  her  own  wordes,  and  I 
conferred   with  some  lordes   that  were  of  greatest  reckoning, 
who  had  seen  and  read  the  letter."     Of  course,  therefore,  there 
was  such  a  letter  written.     But,  within  a  short  time  past,  it  has 
been  found  that  in  the  "  Calendar  of  State  Papers,"  there  is  a 
dispatch  from  Lord  Walsingham,  who  was  then   in  France,  to 
Lord  Burleigh,  dated  June  21,  1571,  in  which  it  appears  that 
there  were  some  negotiations  going  on  in  regard  to  a  marriage 
between  Queen  Elizabeth  and  the  Duke  of  Anjou,  in  which 
Walsingham  says  that  an  "  offer  was  made  by  the  Cardinal  of 
Lorraine,  that  the  Pope  would  have  allowed  and  confirmed  as 
Catholic  the  English  Liturgy  and  other  oflSces,  so  the   Queen, 
my  mistress,  would  have  acknowledged  the  same  as  received 
from  him."     This  was  written  while  the  negotiations  for  the 
marriage  were  pending.     But  after  they  had  failed,  and  Eliza- 
beth   had    refused    to  accept   the  Pope's  offer,  he  issued  his 
famous  bull  of  excommunication.     But  this  statement  of  Wal- 
singham proves  that  such  an  offer  was  made,  and  this  confirms 
the  statement  made  by  Lord  Coke  some  thirty-five  years  after- 
wards.    Now,  although  this  statement  of  Walsingham  does  not 
prove  that  such  a  letter  was  sent,  as  Coke's  statements  do,  it 
proves  that  such  an  offer  was  made,  and  throws  an  important 
light  on  the  motives  and  reasons  for  it. 

'  C.  A.— 28 


ilK 


M 


!!' 


1  l&Mwi 


■[! 


l4lfl 


4S4 


APPENDICES. 


XI. 

GREEK  CATHOLICS  AND  ANGLICAN  ORDERS. 
Lectuke  II;   Page  143. 

Though  Anglican  Orders  have  not  been  oflScially  pro- 
nounced upon  by  the  Greek  Church,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that, 
if  occasion  for  formal  action  should  ever  arise,  their  validity 
would  be  recognized.  Romanists  try  to  make  it  appear  to  the 
uontrary  by  representing  that  when  the  Greek  Church  receives 
one  who  is  in  Anglican  Orders  he  is  reordained.  They  give 
nt)  instance,  and  we  do  not  remember  to  have  seen  the  account 
Hf  any.  Even  if  their  representation  respecting  the  attitude  of 
Hie  Greeks  towards  our  Orders  be  correct,  it  avails  them  noth- 
ing, for  the  Roman  Clergy  must  also  be  reordained  before 
they  are  allowed  to  minister  at  Greek  Altars.  But  we  are 
Inclined  to  doubt  the  correctness  of  their  representation.  It 
ii  not  long  since  we  saw  it  stated  that  a  "faddy"  Ang- 
lican Clergyman  persuaded  a  Russian  nobleman  to  try  to 
arrange  for  his  reordi nation  by  the  Metropolitan  of  St.  Peters- 
burg. But  the  theological  professsor  there  wrote  to  the  Procura- 
tor :  "  Take  care  what  you  are  about,  for  the  Greek  Church  has 
never  disowned  the  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England."  The 
matter  was  looked  into  and  the  Anglican  Priest  returned 
home  without  being  reordained.  The  subject  was  then  given 
as  the  thesis  for  the  theological  degree  in  the  academy,  and  all 
the  students  came  to  the  conclusion  that  our  Orders  were 
valid.  The  statement,  that  at  the  Bonn  Conference  the  Greeks 
voted  against  the  acceptance  of  our  Orders,  has  been  shown  by 
Canon  MacColl  to  be  contrary  to  fact.  "The  chief  Greek 
Churchman  present  was  Archbishop  Lycourgus,  and  he 
iccepted  their  validity." 


I 


GREEK    CATHOLICS    AND    ANGLICAN    ORDERS. 


435 


Some  years  ago,  the  Patriarch  of   Jerusalem  invited    the 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury  to  send  a  Bishop  to  overlook    the 
Anglican  Church  there.     He  has  allowed  our  congregation  the 
use  of  the  Chapel  of  Abraham  in  the  church  of  the  Holy  Sepul- 
chre and  has  often  invited  our  Clergy  to  go  with  him  to  sacred 
Functions,  and  has  placed  them  in  the    Chancel    among   his 
Clergy.     A  short  time  ago,  the  Russian  Bishop  of  California,  at 
the  invitation  of  the  Bishop  of  Iowa,  was  present  in  his  Cathe- 
dral, and  sat  vested  in  his  Chancel.     At  the  Consecration  of 
the  Bishop  of   Massachusetts,  the-  Archbishop  of   Zante,  who 
came  to  represent  the  Eastern  Churches  at  the  World's  Fair 
Parliament  of  Religions,  was  present  in  the  Chancel  during  the 
Function,  and  preached  a  brief  sermon.     He  was  in  attendance 
at  the  opening  of  the  Diocesan  Convention  of  New  York,  and 
received  the  Holy  Communion  at  the  hands  of  Bishop  Potter. 
He  also  made  an  address  at  the  Missionary  Council  in  Chicago. 
In  .lune,  1887,  the  Patriarch  of  Alexandria  wrote  to  the 
Archbishop    of    Canterbury  in   the  following   terms:    "Most 
Reverend  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Exarch  of  all  England, 
my  Lord  Metropolitan  Brother,  Beloved  in  Christ,  my  Lord 
Edward,  we    embrace   your   reverence    in   the  Lord,  and  in 
gladness  address  you." 

In  a  correspondence  which  took  place  in  a.  d.  1896  be- 
tween the  Ecclesiastical  head  of  the  Russian  Church  and  that 
of  the  Anglican  Communion  the  former  addressed  the  latter 
as  follows  :  "  Palladius,  by  Divine  mercy.  Metropolitan  of 
St.  Petersburg  and  Ladoga,  Archimandrite  of  the  Lavra  of  the 
Holy  Trinity  and  St.  Alexander  Nevsky,  Presiding  Member 
of  the  Most  Holy  Governing  Synod  of  all  the  Russias,  unto 
Edward,  Lord  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  Primate  of  All  Eng- 
land and  Metropolitan,  greeting  in  the  Lord." 

Lycourgus,  late  Archbishop  of  Syra  and  Tenedos,  in  a 
speech  at  Ely,  in  a.  d.  1870,  said,  "  When  I  return  to  Greece  I 
will  say  that  the  Church  of  England  is  a  sound  Catholic  Church, 
very  like  our  own." 


/I 
I 


i 


I 

i'Jl'.i.,!/ 


•■"'    .1 


APPENDICES. 

To  the  foregoing  expressions  of  kindly  feeling  toward  the 
English  Church  may  be  added  the  utterances  of  an  Archiman- 
drite in  the  course  of  a  correspondence  in  the  columns  of  the 
West  London  Observer  :  "  Permit  me,  as  a  member  of  the 
oldest  branch  of  the  great  Catholic  Church,  namely,  the  Greek 
Church,  to  state  that  all  right  minded  Catholics  agree  so  far 
with  the  writer  of  the  letter  signed  *  An  English  Catholic,'  as 
to  freedom  of  speech.  It  is  a  great  pity  that  discussion  on 
religious  subjects  is  not  liked  by  the  Roman  Catholic  sec- 
tion, who  are  really,  like  ourselves,  Nonconformists  in  these 
Isles.  The  State  Church  of  England  we  recognize  as  an 
important  branch  of  the  great  Catholic  Church,  which  was 
established  prior  to  the  Roman  Mission.  The  Pope,  or 
Bishop  of  Rome,  is  only  head  of  that  portion  of  the  Cath- 
i^ifS  Church  which  adheres  to  the  Roman  doctrines  of  the 
Cfemicil  of  Trent,  and  has  no  authority  over  the  Greek,  Eng- 
lish, or  any  other  Catholics.  Shakespeare  said,  *  There  is 
no  iffnorance  but  darkness,'  so  let  all  branches  of  the  Cath- 
olic  Church  for  the  future  be  allowed  free  ventilation  of  re- 
ligious subjects." 


JOHN    WESLEY    ON    THE    MINISTERIAL    OFFICE. 


437 


XII. 

JOHN  WESLEY  ON  TEE  MmiSTERIAL  OFFICE. 

Lecture  III ;  Page  211. 

HB  following  is  extracted  from  .John  Wesley's  Sermon 
No.  CXV.  on  "The  Ministerial  Office."  The  text  is, 
"No  man  takoth  this  honour  unto  himself,  but  he  that  is 
culled  of  God,  as  was  Aaron." — Ilebreim  Y:4.  It  was  deliv- 
ered at  a  Conference  of  Methodist  preachers  held  in  th© 
city  of  Cork,  May  4,  1789.  This,  it  is  important  to  remem- 
ber, was  only  two  years  before  the  death  of  Mr.  Wesley  and 
§▼©  years  after  his  reputed   ordination   of  Dr.  Coke  to  the 


Episcopate.  The  utterance  is  noteworthy  on  several  ac- 
counts. It  shows  that  Wesley  up  to  that  late  date  did  not 
intend  to  found  a  Church  ;  that  he  did  not  understand  his 
Service  and  laying  on  of  hands  in  connection  with  Dr.  Coke's 
departure  for  America  as  a  setting  apart  to  the  office  of  a 
Bishop ;  that  he  did  not  feel  constrained  to  depart  from  the 
Church  of  England  in  any  essential  feature  of  doctrine  or 
discipline,  and  in  fact  did  not  do  so,  even  in  non-essentials, 
much  if  any  further  than  such  societies  as  the  Brotherhood  of 
St.  Andrew  have  done  in  our  day ;  and  that  he  did  not  regard 
the  preachers  whom  he  appointed  over  the  Methodist  socie- 
ties, as  standing  on  the  same  footing  with  the  Clergy  of  the 
Church.  It  is  difficult  to  see  how  any  modern  Methodist  in 
the  light  of  these  quotations  can  regard  himself  as  a  follower 
of  John  Wesley. 

"  Many  learned  men  have  shown  at  large  that  our  Lord 
Himself,  and  all  His  Aj)ostles,  built  the  Christian  Church  as 
nearly  as  possible  on  the  plan  of  the  Jewish.  So  the  great 
High  Priest  of  our  profession  sent  Apostles  and  Evangelists 
to  proclaim  glad  tidings  to  all  the  world  ;  and  then  Pastors, 
Preachers,  and  Teachers,  to  build  up  in  the  Faith  the  congre- 
gations that  should  be  founded.  But  I  do  not  find  that  ever 
the  office  of  an  Evangelist  was  the  same  with  that  of  a  Pastor, 
frequently  called  a  Bishop.  He  presided  over  the  flock,  and 
administered  the  Sacraments ;  the  former  assisted  him,  and 
preached  the  Word,  either  in  one  or  more  congregations.  I 
cannot  prove  from  any  part  of  the  New  Testament,  or  from 
any  author  of  the  first  three  centuries,  that  the  office  of  an 
Evangelist  gave  any  man  a  right  to  act  as  a  Pastor  or  Bishop. 

"  But  may  it  not  be  thought  that  the  case  now  before  us 
is  different  from  all  these?  Undoubtedly  in  many  respects  it 
is.  Such  a  phenomenon  has  now  appeared  as  has  not  ap- 
peared in  the  Christian  world  before,  ^.t  least  not  for  many 
ages.  Two  young  men  sowed  the  Word  of  God,  not  only  in 
the  Churches,  but  likewise  literally  *by  the  highway  side;' 
and  indeed  in  every  place  where  they  saw  an  open  door, 
where  sinners  had  ears  to  hear.  They  were  members  of  the 
Church  of  England,  and  had  no  design  of  separating  from  it. 
And   they   advised    all  that   were  of  it  to   continue  therein, 


II 


438 


APPENDICES. 


thoujg^h  they  joined  the  Methodist  society  ;  for  this  did  not 
imply  leaving  their  former  congregation,  but  only  leaving 
their  sins.  Not  long  after,  a  young  man,  Thomas  Maxfield, 
offered  himself  to  serve  them  as  a  son  in  the  Gospel.  And 
then  another,  Thomas  Richards,  and  a  little  after  a  third, 
Thomas  Westell.  Let  it  be  well  observed  on  what  terms  we 
received  these,  namely,  as  Prophets,  not  as  Priests.  We  re- 
ceived them  wholly  and  solelv  to  preach,  not  to  administer 
Sacraments. 

"  In  1744  all  the  Methodist  Preachers  had  their  first  Con- 
ference. But  none  of  them  dreamed  that  the  being  called  to 
preach  gave  them  any  right  to  administer  Sacraments.  And 
when  that  question  was  proposed,  *  In  what  light  are  we  to 
consider  ourselves?'  it  was  answered,  'As  extraordinary 
messengers,  raised  up  to  provoke  the  ordinary  ones  to  jeal- 
ously.' In  order  hereto,  one  of  our  first  rules  was  given  to 
each  Preacher,  *  You  are  to  do  that  part  of  the  work  which  we 
appoint.'  But  what  work  was  this?  Did  we  ever  appoint 
you  to  administer  Sacraments  ;  to  exercise  the  Priestly  office? 
Such  a  design  never  entered  into  our  mind  ;  it  was  the  farthest 
from  our  thoughts.  It  was  several  years  after  our  society  was 
formed,  before  any  attempt  of  this  kind  was  made.  The  first 
was,  I  apprehend,  at  Norwich.  One  of  our  Preachers  there 
yielded  to  the  importunity  of  a  few  of  the  people,  and  baptized 
their  children.  But  as  soon  as  it  was  known,  he  was  informed 
it  must  not  be,  unless  he  designed  to  leave  our  Connexion. 

"  Now,  as  long  as  the  Methodists  keep  to  this  plan,  they 
cannot  separate  from  the  Church.  And  this  is  our  peculiar 
glory.  Methodists  are  not  a  sect  or  party  ;  they  do  not  sepa- 
rate from  the  religious  community  to  which  they  at  first  be- 
longed ;  they  are  still  members  of  the  Church ;  such  they 
desire  to  live  and  to  die.  And  I  believe  one  reason  why  God 
is  pleased  to  continue  my  life  so  long  is  to  confirm  them  in 
their  present  purpose,  not  to  separate  from  the  Church. 

"  But,  notwithstanding  this,  many  warm  men  say,  *  Nay,  but 
you  do  separate  from  the  Church.'  Others  are  equally  warm, 
because  they  say  I  do  not.  I  will  nakedly  declare  the  thing 
as  it  is.  I  hold  all  the  doctrines  of  the  Church  of  England.  I 
love  her  Liturgy.  I  approve  her  plan  of  discipline,  and  only 
wish  it  could  be  put  in  execution.  I  do  not  knowingly  vary 
from  any  rule  of  the  Church,  unless  in  those  few  instances, 
where  I  judge,  and  as  far  as  I   judge,   there   is  an  absolute 


JOHN    WESLEY    ON    THE    MINISTERIAL    OFFICE, 


439 


necessity.  For  instance  (1)  As  few  Clergymen  open  their 
Churches  to  me,  I  am  under  the  necessity  of  preaching  abroad. 
(2)  As  I  know  no  forms  that  will  suit  all  occasions,  I  am 
often  under  a  necessity  of  praying  extempore.  (3)  In  order 
to  build  up  the  flock  of  Christ  in  faith  and  love,  I  am  under  a 
necessity  of  uniting  them  together,  and  of  dividing  them  into 
little  companies,  that  they  may  provoke  one  another  to  love 
and  good  works.  (4)  That  my  fellow-laborers  and  I  may 
more  effectually  assist  each  other  to  save  our  own  souls  and 
those  that  hear  us,  I  judge  it  necessary  to  meet  the  Preachers, 
or,  at  least,  the  greater  part  of  them,  once  a  year.  (5)  Jn 
those  Conferences  we  fix  the  stations  of  all  the  Preachers  for 
the  ensuing  year.  But  all  this  is  not  separating  from  the 
Church.  So  far  from  it,  that,  whenever  I  have  opportunity,  1 
attend  the  Church  Service  myself,  and  advise  all  our  societies 
so  to  do. 

"  I  wish  all  of  you  who  are  vulgarly  termed  Methodists 
would  seriously  consider  what  has  been  said.  And  particu- 
larly you  whom  God  hath  commissioned  to  call  sinners  to 
repentance.  It  does  by  no  means  follow  from  hence,  that  ye 
are  commissioned  to  Baptize,  or  to  administer  the  Lord's  Sup- 
per. Ye  never  dreamed  of  this  for  ten  or  twenty  years  after 
ye  began  to  preach.  Ye  did  not  then,  like  Korah,  Dathan 
and  Abiram,  '  seek  the  Priesthood  also.'  Ye  knew  '  no  man 
taketh  this  honour  unto  himself,  but  he  that  is  called  of  God, 
as  was  Aaron.'  O  contain  yourselves  within  your  own  bounds; 
be  content  with  preaching  the  Gospel ;  '  do  the  work  of 
Evangelists  ;'  proclaim  to  all  the  world  the  loving  kindness  of 
God  our  Saviour  ;  declare  to  all  '  The  Kingdom  of  Heaven  is 
at  hand  ;  repent  ye,  and  believe  the  Gospel !'  I  earnestly  ad- 
vise you,  abide  in  your  place  ;  keep  your  own  station.  Ye 
were  at  first  called  in  the  Church  of  England  ;  and  though  ye 
have  and  will  have  a  thousand  temptations  to  leave  it,  and  set 
up  for  yourselves,  regard  them  not.  Be  Church-of-England 
men  still  ;  do  not  cast  away  the  peculiar  glory  which  God  hath 
put  upon  you,  and  frustrate  the  design  of  Providence,  the 
very  end  for  which  God  raised  you  up." 

The  Rev.  L.  H.  Wellesley  Wesley,  Rector  of  Hatchford, 
England,  an  aged  and  erudite  descendant  of  the  same  family  of 
which  John  and  Charles  Wesley  were  members,  in  an  article 


i 


:l   ' 


I 

4 


440 


APPENDICES. 


fecently  published  in  The  London  Church  Bells,  is  represented 
as  insisting  upon  the  fact  that  the  founder  of  the  original 
Methodist  Societies  was  loyal  to  the  Church  of  which  he  lived 
and  died  a  member.  "  How,"  said  he,  "  the  Wesleyan  minis- 
ters can  call  themselves  *  Rev. '  and  their  chapels  '  churches  ' 
in  the  teeth  of  John  Wesley's  teaching,  I  cannot  understand. 
He  always  called  the  chapels  'preaching  houses'  and  the 
ministers  '  preachers.' 


»» 


XIII. 

THE    NINE    HUNDRED    AND    NINETY-NINE 

YEARS'   LEASE. 

Lecture  IV;  Page  228. 

'T^HE  statement  of  this  passage  having  been  called  in  ques- 
'■'  tion  I  wrote  to  the  learned  author  of  "  The  Continuity 
of  the  English  Church  through  Eighteen  Centuries,"  the  Rev. 
A.  E.  Oldroyd,  Vicar  of  Oundle,  England,  requesting  him  to 
be  good  enough  to  investigate  the  matter  and  let  me  know  the 
result.  In  a  letter  bearing  date  June  8,  1896,  he  gives  the 
following  extracts  from  two  of  the  answers  to  his  inquiries  : 

"  *  St.  Paul's  Chapter,  9  Amen  Court,  London,  E.  C,  Mar., 
18,  1896.  I  cannot  tell  what  is  intended  by  the  passage  which 
you  cite.  It  can  have  no  reference  to  Tillingham,  for  this  was 
given  to  the  Cathedral  by  Ethelbert,  and  has  Leen  in  our  pos- 
session ever  since:  one  of  the  most  interesting  cases  of  contin- 
uous possession  to  be  found.  This  is  no  case  of  a  999  years' 
lease,  but  a  case  of  unbroken  ownership  from  the  days  of 
Ethelbert  who  died,  you  will  remember,  in  616.  Some  estates 
in  London,  notably  the  Finsbury  estate,  have  lately  fallen  in 
after  a  rather  long  lease,  but  not  such  a  lease  as  that  of  which 
you  speak.' 

"  '  St.  Nicholas  Vicarage,  Tillingham,  Maldon,  Essex,  Mar. 
1896.  The  Manor  together  with  the  lands  attached  thereto 
granted  by  Ethelbert,  King  of  Kent,  who  began  to  reign  in 
565,  to  Mellitus  who  was  consecrated  Bishop  of  London  by 


CONTINUITY    OF    THE    ENGLISH    CHURCH    PROVED.         441 


St.  Augustine  of  Canterbury  604,  for  the  endowment  of  his 
monastery  of  St.  Paul  in  London,  still  remains  the  property  of 
the  Dean  and  Chapter  of  St.  Paul's.  As  Ethelbert  died  in  616 
this  grant  must  have  been  made  between  604  and  616,  so  that 
for  nearly  1300  years  the  ownership  has  remained  unchanged, 
a  title  continuous  in  one  corporation  probably  unequaled  in 
the  country.'  " 

"  I  have  tried,"  says  Mr.  Oldroyd,  "  in  various  quarters, 
but  the  above  is  the  best  result  of  my  investigations.  If  not 
the  basis  of  the  999  years'  lease  paragraph,  the  Tillingham 
inheritance  of  St.  Paul's  Cathedral  Chapter,  London,  is  at  any 
rate  quite  as  strong  on  the  continuity  of  the  Church  of 
England." 


XIV. 

CONTINUITY     OF     THE     ENGLISH     CHURCH    PROVED 

BY    THE      UNINTERRUPTED     SUCCESSION 

OF  HER  BISHOPS. 

Lecture  IV;  Page  235. 

'T'  HERE  were  Bishops  in  England  who  carried  on  the 
"*"  canonical  jurisdiction  as  well  as  the  Apostolic  Succes- 
sion through  the  reigns  of  Henry  VIII.,  Edward  VI.,  Mary, 
and  into  the  reign  of  Elizabeth.  For  example,  Kitchin  re- 
mained Bishop  of  Llandaff  through  all  the  changes  from 
A.D.,  1545  to  the  year  1563.  But  the  point  we  wish  to  make 
is  this :  all  the  old  English  Sees  are  at  this  time  occupied  by 
Bishops  who  are*  the  successors  in  unbroken  continuity  of  all 
who  have  preceded  them  in  those  Sees  back  to  the  time  of  the 
first  incumbent.  This  is  not  true  of  the  Succession  of  any 
other  religious  body.  The  only  one  to  which  some  might 
suppose  this  continuity  appertained,  the  Roman  Church,  is 
entirely  without  it,  for  there  is  not  a  single  Roman  Bishop 
in  England  who  has  an  Ecclesiastical  predecessor  in  any 
Bishop  of  the  English  Church,  either  of  the  pre -Reformation 


442 


APPENDICES. 


:|::| 


or  the  post-Reformation  period.  The  Roman  Church  in  Eng- 
land of  to-day  laid  its  corner  stone  in  a.d.  1570,  and  its 
Bishops  and  Priests  ha^e  been  imported  in  most  cases  from 
across  the  Channel,  and  when  not  thus  derived,  their  Orders 
have  come  from  thence.  There  is  no  succession  of  the  Eng- 
lish Roman  Catholic  Hierarchy  which  goes  back  further  than 
September  29,  1850,  when  Dr.  Wiseman  became  the  first 
Cardinal  Archbishop  of  Westminster.  We  thus  have  (1)  The 
identity  of  the  pre -Reformation  with  the  post- Reformation 
Church  of  England,  for  its  Orders  are  unbroken  from  the 
beginning  to  the  present  time.  As  Beard  in  his  "Herbert 
Lectures  "  says,  "  It  is  an  obvious  historical  fact  that  Parker 
was  the  successor  of  Augustine  as  clearly  as  Lanfranc  and 
Becket."  This  being  true  of  the  first  post -Reformation 
Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  it  is  of  course  equally  so  of  the 
present  incumbent.  As  for  the  other  Sees  no  attempt  has 
ever  been  made  to  raise  a  doubt  as  to  whether  an  uninter- 
rupted succession  has  been  maintained.  On  this  point  see 
"  Spiritual  Succession  and  Jurisdiction  in  England,"  by  John 
W.  Lea.  (2)  The  Roman  Church  in  England  at  present  time 
is  a  schismatic  sect,  dating  from  a.d.  1570,  and  has  no  iden- 
tity or  organic  connection  with  the  Church  of  England  before 
or  after  the  Reformation. 

It  must  of  course  be  granted  that  the  corporate  life  of 
the  Church  of  England,  which,  as  we  have  shown  conclusively, 
has  existed  without  interruption  from  the  Apostles,  does  not 
absolutely  prove  the  spiritual  identity  of  the  post-Reforma- 
tion with  the  pre-Reformation  Church.  Ifr  for  illustration, 
the  American  Episcopal  Church  at  the  next  General  Conven- 
tion were  to  exchange  the  Bible  for  the  Koran,  to  deny  the 
doctrine  of  the  Trinity,  and  adopt  Mohammed  as  its  supreme 
prophet,  then,  even,  if  not  a  man  were  changed  there  would 
be  no  spiritual  identity  between  the  Episcopal  Church  after 
the  Convention  of  a.d.  1898  with  that  which  had  existed  be- 
fore.    But   surely  none  will    contend  that   anything   of  this 


THE   ENGLISH    CHURCH    DID    NOT    SECEDE    FROM    ROME.  443 

kind  took  place  in  the  Church  of  England.  No  one  un- 
doubted Catholic  doctrine,  practice  or  institution  was  abol- 
ished at  the  Reformation,  nor  were  there  any  novel  doctrines, 
practices  or  institutions  imposed  at  that  time  or  since. 


XV. 
THE  ENGLISH  CHURCH  DID  NOT  SECEDE  FROM  ROME, 

Lecture  IV;  Page  250. 

13  OMANISTS  in  England  were  enjoined  by  the  Papal  Bull 
of  A.  D.  1570  to  withdraw  from  the  Church  of  England. 
Many  of  the  English   Laity  and  some  of  tlie  Clergy  obeyed 
this  summons  and  organized  another  religious  body,  separate 
and  distinct  from  the  English  Church.     This  was  a  schismatic 
procedure  by  the  Roman  element,  for  it  deliberately  left  the 
regular  Church  of  England  and  formed  a  new  body  in  opposi- 
tion thereto.     Truth  and  justice  require   it  to  be  made  plain 
even  at  the  risk  of  frequent  reiteration  that  the  first  division  of 
English  Christians  was  effected  by  a  few  sympathizers  with  the 
Papacy  in  obedience  to  the  mandate  of  Pius  V.     The  Eno-Hsh 
Catholics  and   patriots,  now  commonly  called  Churchmen  or 
Episcopalians,  continued    on    as   usual    without   withdrawing 
themselves  from  any  one.     The  vast  majority  of  the    inhabi- 
tants remained  in  the  old  Ecdesia  Anglicana  which  still  con- 
tinues  and   always  will   remain  preeminently  the   Church   of 
that  country  and  our  race.     The  following  brief  and  accurate 
account  of  the  beginning  of  the  Roman    schism  in  England 
is   extracted  from  Palmer's  Church  History :  "  The  accession 
of  the  illustrious  Queen  Elizabeth  was  followed  by  the  restora- 
tion of  the  Church  to  its  former  state.  '  The  Clergy  o-ener- 
ally  approved  of  the  return   to  pure    religion,   and  retained 
their   benefices,  administering  the    Sacraments   and  rites  ac- 
cording  to  the    English  Ritual.      There   was  7io   schism  for 
many  years  in  England,  all  the  people  worshipp)ecl  in  the 


I    • 


'V 


i'l 


J  f 

'Hi 


i|:^ 


444 


APPENDICES. 


same  Churches,  and  acknowledged  the  same  pastors.  At 
last,  In  liii,  Pius  V.  issued  a  bull,  in  which  he  excommuni- 
cated Queen  Elizabeth  and  her  supporters,  absolved  her  sub- 
jects from  their  oaths  of  allegiance,  and  bestowed  her  domin- 
ions on  the  King  of  Spain.  This  hull  caused  the  schism  in 
England ;  for  the  Popish  party,  which  had  continued  in 
communion  with  the  Church  of  England  up  to  that  time,  dur- 
ing the  past  eleven  years  of  Elizabeth's  reign,  now  began  to 
separate  themselves.  Bedingfield,  Cornwallis,  and  Silyarde, 
were  the  first  Popish  recusants;  and  the  date  of  the  Romanists 
in  England,  as  a  distinct  sect  or  community,  may  be  fixed  in 
the  year  1570." 

Cardinal  Manning  was  once  of  the  opinion  that  the  schism 
of  A.  D.  1570  did  not  proceed  from  the  English  King  and 
Church,  but  from  Rome,  and  as  logical  deductions  from  histor- 
ical facts  do  not  vary  with  a  change  of  Ecclesiastical  relation- 
ship, his  words  are  here  quoted  :  "  Tlie  Crown  and  Church  of 
England  with  a  steady  opposition  resisted  the  entrance  and 
encroachment  of  the  secularized  Ecclesiastical  power  of  the 
Pope  in  England.  The  last  rejection  of  it  was  no  more  than 
a  successful  effort  after  many  a  failure  in  struggles  of  the  like 
land.  And  it  was  an  act  taken  by  men  who  were  sound, 
•iicording  to  the  Roman  doctrines,  in  all  other  points.  There 
is  no  one  point  in  which  the  British  Churches  can  be  attainted 
of  either  heresy  or  schism.  She,  the  Anglican  Church,  has 
rejected,  what  the  Eastern  Churches  rejected  before,  the  arro- 
gant pretense  of  a  universal  pontificate  rashly  alleged  to  be 
of  Divine  right,  imposed  in  ojien  breach  of  Apostolical  tradi- 
tions and  the  canons  of  many  councils.  The  Churches  of  the 
East  are  not  schismatical  for  their  rejection  of  this  usurpation; 
neither  are  the  Churches  of  Britain.  But  they  are  guilty  of 
the  schism  that  obtrude  this  novelty  as  the  condition  of  Chris- 
tian QoxnmunioQ." 


HARRIET    BEECHER    STOWE. 


445 


XVI. 

HARRIET  BEECHER  STOWE. 

Lecture  V;  Page  296. 

THERE  seems  to  be  some  room  for  dispute  as  to  the 
Church  relationship  of  Mrs.  Stowe.  The  statements  of 
this  book,  which  were  based  upon  what  appeared  to  be  trust- 
worthy testimony,  having  been  called  in  question  by  an 
esteemed  correspondent,  an  effort  was  made  to  ascertain  the 
truth  of  the  matter.  After  putting  together  all  the  facts  that 
conveniently  could  be  collected,  it  was  concluded  that  what 
had  been  written  might  as  well  remain  unaltered.  For,  while 
it  appeared  that  she  had  never  been  confirmed  and  was  during 
all  her  life  nominally  a  Congregationalist,  her  attachment  for 
and  interest  in  the  Episcopal  Church  were  such  as  to  lead  peo- 
ple generally,  and  even  members  of  her  own  family,  to  sup- 
pose that  she  was  an  Episcopalian  in  body  as  well  as  at  heart. 
The  following  interesting  passage  from  the  "  Reminiscences  of 
Harriet  Beecher  Stowe,"  by  Elizabeth  Stuart  Phelps  Ward, 
shows  which  way  the  wind  blew  as  far  back  as  her  Andover 
life,  A.D.  1852-64  : 

"  I  dimly  suspected  then,  and  I  have  been  sure  of  it  since, 
that  the  privilege  of  neighborhood  was  but  scantily  a|)preciated 
in  Andover,  in  the  case  of  this  eminent  woman.  Why,  I  do 
not  know.  She  gave  no  offense,  that  I  can  recall,  to  the 
peculiar  preferences  of  the  place.  The  fact  that  she  was 
rumored  to  have  leanings  towards  the  Episcopal  Church  did 
not  prevent  her  from  dutifully  occupying  with  her  family  her 
husband's  pew  in  the  old  chapel.  It  was  far  to  the  front,  and 
her  Ecclesiastical  delinquencies  would  have  been  only  too 
visible,  had  they  existed.  A  tradition  that  she  visited  the 
theatre  in  Boston  when  she  felt  like  it,  sometimes  passed 
solemnly  from  lip  to  lip;  but  this  is  the  most  serious  criticism 
upon  her  which  I  can  remember." 


446 


APPENDICES. 


In  the  Life  of  Mrs.  Stowe,  edited  by  her  son,  the  statement  is 
made  that  she  had  joined  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church, 
some  time  before  a.  d.  1867.  But  the  Clergyman  who 
was  the  Rector  of  the  little  Parish  at  Mandarin,  Florida, 
her  winter  home,  informs  me  that  this  cannot  be  true,  because 
in  the  year  1882  she  told  him  that  she  had  not  been  confirmed, 
and  was  thinking  seriously  of  receiving  the  Apostolic  Rite  of 
the  laying  on  of  hands.  "  Mrs.  Stowe,"  says  this  Clergyman, 
who  was  her  pastor  for  several  years,  "did  not  believe  in 
Episcopacy  as  the  only  form  of  Church  Polity,  but  she  did  be- 
lieve the  Anglican  Church  to  have  the  best  system  of  worship 
and  teaching.  Her  three  daughters  were  all  thorough  Church - 
women."  One  of  these  in  a  letter  bearing  date  September 
3,  1896,  speaking  of  her  mother's  failure  to  come  to  Confir- 
mation, says:  "Her  reason  for  this  she  never  told  me,  but  I 
always  supposed  it  was  because  of  a  feeling  of  loyalty  and 
allegiance  to  her  husband.  I  can  say  to  you  with  full  assur- 
ance of  the  truth  of  the  statement,  that  at  heart  she  was 
warmly  and  sincerely  an  ardent  Episcopalian."  In  another 
letter  she  says:  "From  the  time  of  the  removal  of  my  father 
and  mother  from  Andover  to  Hartford  in  1864,  my  mother 
attended  regularly  the  Episcopal  Church,  going  to  the  Com- 
munion as  well.  Trinity  Church  was  the  last  Church  she 
ever  attended,  and  there  she  took  her  last  Communion.  That 
the  Episcopal  Church  was  the  Church  of  her  choice  and  her 
heart,  there  is  in  my  mind  no  room  for  doubt."  The  Rev. 
Storrs  O.  Seymour,  in  a  communication  to  the  Living  Church 
dated  Litchfield,  Connecticut,  September  5,  1896,  says : 
"While  the  Rev.  Charles  E.  Stowe  was  pastor  of  the  Windsor 
Avenue  Congregational  Church  in  Hartford,  Conn.,  his  mother 
generally  attended  the  services  of  that  Church.  After  his 
resignation  she  attended  Trinity  Church,  frequently  express- 
ing to  the  rector  the  satisfaction  and  pleasure  which  the 
Church  Service  afforded  her.  She  was  especially  delighted 
with  the  vested  choir." 


HARRIET   ^EECHER    STOWE. 


447 


Mrs.  Stowe  was  counted  among  the  most  deeply  interested 
and  active  Church  workers  in  the  Diocese  of  Florida.  In 
A.  D.  1866  she  wrote  to  her  brother,  the  Rev.  Charles 
Beecher,  a  letter  in  which  she  says  :  "  The  Episcopal  Church 
is  undertaking,  under  direction  of  the  future  Bishop  of  Florida, 
a  ^de  embracing  scheme  of  Christian  activity  for  the  whole 
State.  In  this  work  I  desire  to  be  associated."  In  1867  she 
wrote  to  him  another  letter,  as  follows  :  "  I  am  now  in  corre- 
spondence with  the  Bishop  of  Florida,  with  the  view  to 
establishing  a  line  of  Churches  along  the  line  of  the  St.  John's 
river,  and  if  I  settle  at  Mandarin,  it  will  be  one  of  my  sta- 
tions. Will  you  consent  to  enter  the  Episcopal  Church,  and 
be  our  Clergyman?  You  are  just  the  man  we  want.  If  my 
tasks  and  feelings  did  not  incline  me  toward  the  Church,  I 
should  still  choose  it  as  the  best  system  for  training  immature 
minds,  such  as  those  of  our  negroes." 

The  winter  of  a.  d.  1883-1884  was  the  last  one  spent  by 
hor  at  Mandarin,  which,  largely  through  her  efforts,  had 
been  provided  with  a  pretty  little  Episcopal  Church,  to  which 
was  attached  a  comfortable  rectory.  In  January  of  that  year 
she  wrote  :  "  Mandarin  looks  very  gay  and  airy  now  with  its 
new  villas  and  our  new  Church  and  rectory." 

Upon  one  occasion,  when  consulted  by  some  neighboring 
resorters,  among  whom  were  representatives  of  several  bodies 
of  Christians,  about  what  had  better  be  done  in  regard  to 
the  establishment  of  religious  services,  Mrs.  Stowe  strongly 
recommended  them  to  request  the  Bishop  to  send  a  Missionary 
to  the  community  because,  aside  from  the  superiority  of  her 
Services,  the  Episcopal  Church  was  the  only  one  comprehen- 
sive enough  to  include  them  all. 

It  is  believed  that  in  view  of  the  above  showing,  no  rea- 
sonable exception  can  be  taken  to  the  representation  that  the 
authoress  of  "  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin  "  was  an  Episcopalian. 

It  may  be  observed  by  the  way  that  Miss  Catherine 
Beecher,  Mrs.  Stowe's  elder  sister,  to  whose  excellent  school 


I'  I 


t"' 


II 


448 


APPENDICES. 


she  owed  so  much,  was  also  a  staunch  Episcopalian.  In  some 
oilier  writings  Miss  Beecher  expresses  regret  that  her  mother, 
after  marriage,  saw  fit  to  leave  the  Episcopal  Church  and 
become  a  Presbyterian  in  order  that  she  might  be  with  her 
husband.  She  thought  that  the  father  sooner  or  later  would 
liave  followed  the  mother  into  the  Church,  whose  Liturgy  and 
system  of  religious  culture  would  have  furnished  the  family 
with  a  much  needed  balance-wheel,  and  saved  it  from  its 
checkered  religious  history. 

We  affree  with  Miss  Beecher  that  the  idea  of  a  wife  being 
obliged  to  follow  the  husband  in  the  matter  of  religious 
affiliation,  or  vice  versd,  is  all  wrong  from  whatever  point  of 
view.  As  the  well-instructed  Episcopalian  looks  at  it,  no 
consideration  will  justify  a  person  in  leaving  the  Catholic 
Church  of  his  race  and  country.  And  in  the  eyes  of  a  con- 
sistent Denominationalist,  division  being  a  good  thing,  it 
ought  to  seem  desirable  or  at  least  allowable  that  every  mem- 
ber of  a  household  should  belong  to  a  different  body  of 
Christians. 

XVII. 

HENRY  CLAY, 

Lectube  V ;  Page  299. 

THE  following  letter  from  the  Rev.  Dr.  E.  H.  Ward,  Rector 
of  Christ  Church,  Lexington,  Kentucky,  was  published  in 
77ie  Pacific  Churchman  of  June  15, 1896.  As  the  editor  in 
his  prefatory  note  remarks,  it  furnishes  ground  for  the  infer- 
ence that  Mr.  Clay  might  have  used  the  remarkable  language 
attributed  to  him,  but  does  not  establish  the  fact  that  he 
actually  did  make  the  statement  quoted.  However,  it  appears, 
by  the  mouth  of  two  reliable  witnesses,  that  the  words  were 
really  expressive  of  his  thought : 

"  Editor  of  The  Pacific  Churchman: 

**  Bishop  Dudley  some  weeks  ago  referred  to  me  a  letter 


HENRY    CLAY. 


449 


from ,  of ,  in  regard  to  a  quotation  from  Henry 

Clay.  It  was  the  one  in  which  Mr.  Clay  said  that  his  hope  for 
the  future  of  the  United  States  was  in  the  Supreme  Court  and 
the  Episcopal  Church.  I  have  asked  some  of  Mr.  Clay's 
grandchildren  about  it,  but  they  can  give  me  no  information 
upon  the  subject. 

"  .Judge  Richard  Buckner,  who  is  now  past  four  score,  and 
before  whom  Mr.  Clay  often  appeared  as  an  advocate,  is  not 
able  to  locate  the  quotation  ;  but  he  said  to  me  that  it  was  so 
in  line  with  Mr.  Clay's  thought  that  it  might  have  been  spoken 
at  any  time,  and  on  almost  any  occasion. 

"The  late  Mr.  James  O.  Harrison,  who  was  at  one  time  Mr. 
Clay's  law  partner,  and  who  was  also  his  executor,  said  to  me 
essentially  the  same  thing.  So  then  if  we  cannot  locate  the 
saying,  the  testimony  of  these  two  gentlemen  is  sufficient  to 
assure  us  that  it  was  in  keeping  with  Mr.  Clay's  thought,  and 
so  we  have  a  right  to  use  it. 

"As  I  have  lost  Mr. 's  address,  I  take  this  method  of 

answering  his  question,  hoping  that  it  may  be  of  interest  to 
others  besides  him.  E.  H.  Ward  " 

"  Lexington,  Ky.,  May  25,  1896." 

Upon  reading  this  correspondence  it  occurred  to  me  that 
it  had  grown  out  of  the  passage  of  this  book  indicated 
above.  I  had  heard  the  statement  made  in  an  interesting 
address  delivered  by  the  Bishop  of  Delaware  at  the  laying  of  the 
corner  stone  of  St.  Mary's  Chapel,  St.  Mary's,  Ohio,  in  the 
year  1889.  After  reading  Dr.  Waid's  letter  in  The  Pacific 
Churchman,  I  inquired  of  Bishop  Coleman  concerning  the 
source  of  his  information.  In  a  letter  bearing  date.  Bishop- 
stead,  Wilmington,  Delaware,  July  3,  1896,  he  says:  "I 
cannot  now  possibly  give  you  my  authority  for  the  reported 
saying  of  Henry  Clay.  But  I  am  still  satisfied  that  the 
authority  was  such  as  made  and  makes  me  confident  to  repeat 
the  statement.  The  Clergyman  who-  baptized  Henry  Clay, 
and  to  whom  it  might  be  well  for  you  to  write,  is  the  Rev. 
Edward  F.  Berkley,  D.D.,  St.  Louis,  Missouri."  In  a  con- 
versation with  the  Rev.  Dr.  Ward  he  told  me  that  his  letter 
to   The  Pacific  Churchman  was  in  response  to   an   inquiry 

C.  A.— 29 


i1 


r 


[  '<  'lb 


APPKJfDICES. 

concerning  the  crrounds  tef  wtit  was  said  about  Mr.  Clay  in 
**The  Church  for  Americans,"  and  that  he  had  heard  the  late 
Judge  Sheffy  in  a  speech  at  a  General  Convention  of  the 
Church  make  the  same  statement.  The  Doctor  regretted  that 
In  his  letter  he  had  not  remembered  to  add  this  important 
testimony  to  that  of  Judge  Buckner  and  Mr.  Harrison.  He 
thought  it  probable  that  the  Bishop  of  Delaware  had  also 
eithcT  heard  Judge  Sheffy  make  the  statement  in  question  or 
read  it  in  the  New  York  Churchman's  report  of  the  Con- 
vention. 

In  accoTclance  with  Bishop  Coleman's  suggestion,  I  wrote  to 
the  Venerable  Dr.  Berkley,  now  in  his  eighty-third  year,  who 
replied  in  the  following  letter,  which  is  a  valuable  contribution 
to  the  biography  of  one  of  the  most  prominent  and  interesting 
figures  of  American  history  : 

"  PiTTSBTTRGH,  Pa.,  July  15,  1896. 

"  Reverend  and  Dear  Brother  : 

**  You  ask  a  siraj)le  question  about  a  sentiment  attributed 
to  Henry  Clay.  I  give  you  the  answer,  but  a  statement  from 
your  book  which  you  quote  moves  me  to  say  something 
about  his  religious  character.  You  have  referred  to  me  for 
information  about  an  exi)ression  of  opinion  on  his  part  *  that 
the  stability  of  our  government  depends  upon  the  perpetua- 
tion of  two  institutions,  to  wit,  the  Episcopal  Church,  and 
the  Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States.'  This  is  very  like 
him,  and  he  may  have  expressed  this  sentiment  to  others,  but 
never  to  me.  Although  so  much  younger,  as  his  Pastor,  I 
was  in  intimate  intercourse  with  him  for  fourteen  years  of  his 
life,  from  1838  to  the  time  of  his  death  in  1852.  He  often 
spoke  of  the  dignity  and  beauty  of  the  Church  Service,  and  of 
its  adaptability  to  strengthen  the  struggling  infirmities  of  a 

'  poor  sinner.' 

"This  expression  leads  me  to  notice  another  statement 
made  in  your  book,  and  which  you  quote  in  your  letter,  '  this 
great  statesman  and  orator  did  not  identify  himself  with  any 
form  of  organized  Christianity  until  late  in  life.'  A  religious 
vein  ran  through  his  nature,  and  more  than  once  he  said  in  a 
public  speech, '  I  am  not  a  Christian,  but  I  hope  to  give  evi- 
dence of  my  faith  in  the  excellence  and  Divine  authenticity  of 


HENRY   CLAY. 


451 


Christianity  before  I  die.'  His  family  were  Baptists,  but  I 
believe  he  felt  a  strong  interest  in  the  Church  from  his  early 
life. 

"  And  here  let  me  say  even  with  the  fear  of  wearying  you 
by  going  so  far  aside  from  your  letter,  that  he  did  not  talk 
seriously  of  Baptism  until  he  had  taken  leave  of  the  Senate, 
and  as  he  supposed  retired  from  public  life.  He  feared  that 
if  he  made  the  sacred  promises  of  Baptism,  and  the  ordinances 
following,  he  might  in  his  relations  to  public  life  do  something 
that  would  compromise  his  Church  and  his  profession.  When 
he  was  seventy  years  old  in  June,  1847,  1  administered  the 
Rite  of  Baptism  to  him  and  a  daugliter-in-law,  with  three  or 
four  of  her  children,  in  the  parlor  at  Ashland,  and  not,  as  the 
Baptists  proclaim  to  this  day,  '  in  one  of  the  beautiful  ponds  of 
Ashland.'  I  was  familiar  with  the  surroundings  of  that  lovely 
country  home,  but  I  never  saw  any  beautiful  ponds.  He  came 
to  the  Communion  on  Sunday  the  Fourth  of  July  after,  and 
was  confirmed  by  Bishop  Smith  within  a  week  or  two. 

"  He  was  afterward  sent  back  to  the  Senate,  pending  the 
then  absorbing  question  of  the  Missouri  Compromise,  where 
his  burdened  mind  and  forensic  efforts  killed  him.  He  died 
in  Washington  city  on  the  fifth  anniversary  of  his  Baptism, 
June  28,  1852,  and  was  consigned  *to  earth,  ashes  and  to 
dust'  in  Lexington  Cemetery  on  the  10th  of  July. 

"  To  a  Churchman  I  ought  to  say,  that  he  was  baptized  in 
his  house,  because  we  were  then  building  a  Church,  in  which 
he  manifested  great  personal  interest,  and  I  had  no  better 
place  for  the  Service. 

"  I  could  write  much  in  detailing  reminiscences  of  this 
wonderful  man,  but  if  you  have  interest  enough  in  this  great 
character  to  endure  what  I  have  already  said,  I  shall  be 
gratified.  I  am  cordially  yours, 

"Rev.  Wm.  M.  Brown."  Ed.  F.  Berkley." 


i , 


il 


m 


f. 


452 


APPENDICES. 


XVIII. 

REFORMED  EPISCOPALIANS. 
Lecture  V ;  Page  303. 

I  HAVE  learned  recently  to  my  great  surprise  tliat  Reformed 
Episcopalians  are  often   guilty  of  the  grossest  misrepre- 
sentations in  their  efforts  to  persuade  our  members  and  those 
who  have  their  faces  turned  towards  the  old  Catholic  and  His- 
toric Episcopal  Church  to  identify  themselves  with  the  modem 
sect  known  as  the  "  Reformed  Episcopal  Church."     They  say 
Miat  the  two  Churches  properly  may  be  regarded  as  twin  sisters  ; 
Id  that  by  becoming  a  member  of  either  of  them  a  person  con- 
nects himself  with  the  great  Church  of  the  English  speaking 
race.  The  distinguishing  characteristics  of  these  sister  Churches 
are  represented  to  be  that  the  sympathies  of  her,  who  is  denom- 
inated "Reformed  Episcopal,"  are  wholly  with  Protestantism, 
wMle  those  of  the  "  Protestant  Episcopal  "  are  centered  in  Ro- 
manism.     They   commonly   speak  of   their   body   as,    "Low 
Church  "  and  of  ours  as  "  High  Church." 

Though  I  had  heard  from  persons  who  seemed  to  know 
whereof  they  spoke,  that  these  reprehensible  tactics  were  being 
used  by  the  Reformers,  I  could  not  believe  that  it  was  generally 
the  case  until  assured  of  its  truth  by  their  members  and  publi- 
cations. .Their  senior  and  most  distinguished  Bishop,  Dr. 
Cheney,  of  Chicago,  speaking  of  the  origin  of  the  Reformed 
Episcopal  Church,  says  :  "  The  roots  of  the  plant  which  has 
seemingly  sprung  up  in  the  soil  of  the  United  States  of  Amer- 
ica and  in  the  last  third  of  the  nineteenth  century  are  imbedded 
in  that  fertile  age,  the  Reformation  of  the  sixteenth  century. 
From  that  hour  the  Church  of  England  rose  to  that  place  o! 
influence  which  she  has  held  through  three  hundred  years.     It 


REFORMED    EPISCOPALIANS. 


453 


might  have  been  justly  said  of  her  as  of  Rebecca  of  old,  '  Two 
nations  are  in  thy  womb,  two  manner  of  people  shall  be  sepa- 
rated from  thy  bowels.'  "  Again  he  compares  the  relationship 
of  the  body  to  which  he  belongs  and  the  Episcopal  Church  to 
two  chestnuts  lying  peacefully  in  the  same  bur ;  but  in  a.  d. 
1873  the  shell  burst  and  the  chestnuts  went  in  opposite  direc- 
tions. Elsewhere  he  maintains  that  "  in  one  sense  this  Church 
is  not  a  new  Communion,  but  the  old  Episcopal  Church."  In 
his  sermon  at  the  Consecration  of  Dr.  Cheney,  Bishop  Cum- 
mins declared,  "  We  claim  to  be  the  old  and  true  Protestant 
Episcopalians  of  the  days  immediately  succeeding  the  Amer- 
ican Revolution." 

The  fallacy  involved  in  this  position  would  seem  to  be  suf- 
ficiently obvious.  It  lies  in  the  mistaking  of  a  party  in  the 
Church  for  a  coordinate  branch  of  the  Church.  The  analogy 
of  Rebecca's  twins  is  not  quite  apt,  for,  notwithstanding  their 
differentiating  characteristics,  they  were  equally  able  to  per- 
petuate a  posterity  of  the  same  organic  kind :  whereas  the 
conception  of  heretical  doctrines  and  their  promulgation  by 
contentious  and  schismatical  individuals  is  not  a  thing  of  the 
same  kind  as  the  continuity  of  organization.  When  certain 
members  of  the  Low  Church  party  separated  themselves  from 
the  American  branch  of  the  Anglican  Communion  they  sev- 
ered all  connection  with  that  body  and  organized  a  new  body 
having  no  more  continuity  with  the  old  than  the  society  of 
Presbyterians,  or  Baptists,  or  Methodists.  The  fact  that  their 
secession  was  headed  by  a  Bishop  did  not  alter  its  character, 
for  it  was  nevertheless  a  going  out  of  individuals  from  a 
preexisting  and  continuous  body.  Dr.  Cummins  held  his 
Bishopric  solely  for  use  in  the  Catholic  Church  and  not 
outside  of  or  against  it.  There  was  no  preexisting  organic 
unity  between  him  and  his  followers  making  them  in  any 
sense  a  Church  or  a  constituent  part  thereof  sharing  with  her 
her  inherent  self-perpetuating  power.  They  were  simply  an 
aggregation  of  persons  who  organized  themselves  into  a  body 


'*! 


454 


APPENDICES. 


which  hitherto  had  no  corporate  existence  of  any  kind.  This 
argument  is  equally  applicable  to  Dr.  Cheney's  "  chestnuts  ! " 
We  think  that  any  one  who  will  candidly  investigate  the 
subject  in  the  light  of  history  and  Canon  law  cannot  escape 
the  conviction  that  if  an  American  would  join  the  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church  of  our  race,  there  is  no  way  of  doing  so  ex- 
cept by  entering  the  Protestant  Episcopal  Church.  Residents 
of  the  British  Empire  must  unite  with  the  Mother  Church  of 
England  or  one  of  her  Colonial  branches.  By  joining  the  Re- 
formed Episcopalians  a  person  no  more  becomes  a  member 
of  the  Anglo-Catholic  Communion  than  if  he  were  to  join  the 
Methodist  or  Presbyterian  body.  There  is  in  fact  practically 
no  essential  difference  between  the  Reformed  Episcopal 
Church  and  the  various  sixteenth  century  and  later  Denomi- 
nations ;  at  least  there  is  none  which  they  admit.  It  might 
at  first  sight  seem  that  this  statement  needs  modification, 
so  far  as  the  ministry  is  concerned,  for  their  Orders  are  traced 
to  Bishop  Cummins,  who  had  been  duly  Consecrated  a  Bishop 
in  the  American  branch  of  the  Apostolic  and  Catholic  Church 
of  Christ.  But,  aside  from  the  fact  that  his  Consecration  of 
Dr.  Cheney  was  a  schismatic  and  unlawful  act.  Bishop  Cum- 
mins was  afterwards  Canonically  deposed.  It  should  also  be 
remembered  that  Dr.  Cummins  was  only  the  assistant  Bishop 
of  Kentucky,  and  as  such  he  had  no  jurisdiction  except  what 
was  delegated  by  his  superior.  He  was  expressly  forbidden 
by  his  Diocesan,  who  was  at  the  time  also  the  executive  head 
of  the  House  of  Bishops,  to  Consecrate  Dr.  Cheney.  Never- 
theless he  proceeded,  and  this  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  in 
doing  so  he  violated  his  Ordination  vows  which  constitute  one 
of  the  most  solemn  oaths  which  a  man  can  take.  If,  therefore, 
the  Reformers  claim  that  they  share  the  Historic  Episcopal 
Succession  with  the  Anglican  Communion,  we  answer  yes,  but 
so  far  only  as  the  mere  laying  on  of  hands  is  concerned  ;  you 
have  no  jurisdiction,  and  what  you  have  would  not  be  yours 
but  for   the  perjury  of  him  who  gave   it.     His  schism  and 


KEFORMED    EPISCOPALIANS. 


455 


deposition  historically  and  legally  separated  him  from  the 
Anglican  Communion.  If  to  this  it  be  replied  that  the  Church 
from  which  the  American  Episcopal  body  is  sprung  was  also 
schismatic,  we  refer  to  Appendix  XIV.,  which  conclusively 
shows  to  the  contrary. 

It  is  a  curious  fact  that,  though  the  ''  Reformed  "  body  make 
a  great  deal  of  the  Historic  Episcopate  when  competing  with 
Episcopalians  for  members,  in  their  efforts  to  commend  them- 
selves to  non-Episcopalians,  they  deny  that  Episcopacy  is  a 
Divine  institution,  and  that  there  is  such  a  thing  as  Apostolic 
Succession.  The  action  of  their  late  General  Council  in  for- 
bidding the  reordination  of  Denominational  ministers  was, 
therefore,  much  more  consistent  than  the  stress  which  they  put 
upon  the  Historic  Episcopacy  as  a  distinguishing  feature 
between  them  and  other  sectarians.  If,  for  the  sake  of  argu- 
ment, we  admit  —  what  would  probably  not  be  conceded 
by  any  great  Canonist  —  that  this  body  possesses  a  valid 
Historic  Succession,  it  is,  nevertheless,  difficult  to  see  how 
such  of  their  congregations  as  are  without  an  Episcopally  or- 
dained Clergyman,  and  there  are  several  of  them,  can  derive 
any  profit  from  the  Succession.  Paradoxical  as  it  may  seem, 
there  are  probably  scores  among  the  Reformed  Episcopalians 
who  have  never  received  the  Holy  Communion  at  the  hands  of 
any  minister  who  has  received  Episcopal  Ordination. 

The  Reformed  Episcopalians  are  nothing  more  or  less  than 
Prayer  Book  Methodists.  At  a  Methodist  Conference  held  in 
Baltimore,  Bishop  Cummins  declared  that  he  and  his  followers 
were  enveloped  with  a  very  thin  Episcopal  shell  which  only  had 
to  be  broken  to  reveal  the  full  fledged  Methodist.  They  went 
out  from  us  because  we  refused  to  revise  our  Liturgy  so  that 
its  doctrine  concerning  the  Ministry  and  Sacraments  would 
conform  with  the  ideas  which  prevail  among  Denomina- 
tionalists.  It  is  very  easily  shown  that  the  objections  to  the 
Episcopal  Church  which  they  made  the  basis  of  their  schism 
apply  quite  as  much  to  the  Bible  as  to  the  Book  of   Common 


I 


I .  i 


456 


APPENDICES. 


Prayer.  This  will  be  apparent  upon  the  mere  mention  of 
the  passages  in  our  Liturgy  to  which  they  took  exception. 
The  italicised  words  and  phrases  in  the  following  quotations 
were  their  great  stumbling-blocks :  (1)  "  Receive  the  Holy 
Ghost  for  the  office  and  work  oi  Priest  in  the  Church  of  God." 
(2)  "  Hath  given  power  and  commandment  to  His  ministers  to 
declare  and  pronounce  to  His  people  being  penitent  the  Abso- 
itition  and  remission  of  their  sins."  (3)  "Seeing  now,  dearly 
beloved,  that  this  child  is  regenerate  and  grafted  into  the  body 
of  Christ's  Church,  let  us  give  thanks  unto  Almighty  God  for 
these  benefits."  And  "  it  has  pleased  Thee  to  regenerate  this 
child  with  Thy  Holy  Spirit."  (4)  "  Almighty  and  everliving 
God  we  most  heartily  thank  Thee  for  that  Thou  dost  vouchsafe 
to  feed  us,  who  have  duly  received  these  holy  mysteries  with 
the  spiritual  food  of  the  most  precious  Body  and  Blood  of  Thy 
Son  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ." 

1.  Great  exception  is  taken  to  the  word  "  Priest;"  but  it 
should  be  remembered  that  this  is  the  general  name  for 
ministers  of  religion  in  all  ages  and  countries.  It  occurs  many 
times  in  the  Old  and  New  Testaments ;  in  the  latter  it  is 
generally  translated  "Elder."  That  the  Christian  Church 
was  to  have  Priests  in  the  Old  Testament  sense  appears  both 
from  prophecy  and  early  history.  Christ  was  "  A  Priest  for 
ever  after  the  order  of  Melchizedek."  The  word  "order" 
implies  more  than  one,  a  succession.  The  Church  of  Christ 
therefore,  has  a  succession  of  Priests  of  which  He  is  the  Head. 
We  have  the  writings  of  some  of  the  immediate  successors  of 
the  Apostles,  such,  for  example,  as  the  epistles  of  Ignatius, 
A.  D.  107  and  Polycarp,  a.  d.  108,  in  which  the  Ministry  of 
the  Christian  Church  is  represented  as  constituted  of  Bishops, 
Priests  and  Deacons.  I  turn  to  the  short  letter  of  the  Martyr 
Ignatius,  written  to  the  Magnesians,  and  find  that  the  word 
"  Priest "  in  its  uncontracted  form.  Presbyter,  occurs  at  least 
five  times* 

3.  It  is  jilso  very  certain  that  the  Prayer  Book  Jjas  no  wore 


REFORMED    EPISCOPALIANS. 


457 


to  say  about  Ministerial  Absolution  than  the  Bible.  Christ  said 
to  the  Apostles,  and  through  them  to  their  successors  and  dele- 
gates: "Whosesoever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto 
them;  and  whosesoever  sins  ye  retain,  they  are  retained." 

3.  The  Prayer  Book  doctrine  of  Regeneration  furnishes  the 
Reformers  their  greatest  pretext  for  schism.  But  our  Lord  said  : 
"  Except  a  man  be  born  of  water  and  of  the  Spirit  he  cannot 
enter  into  the  Kingdom  of  God."  Much  confusion  arises  from  the 
failure  of  Methodists  and  Reformed  Episcopalians  to  distinguish 
birth  from  the  beginning  of  life.  These  are  by  no  means  the 
same  thing.  In  fact  birth  presupposes  the  existence  of  life ; 
it  is  therefore  the  transition  from  one  state  of  existence  to 
another.  This  is  also  true  of  the  regeneration  or  new  birth 
which  Catholic  Christians  in  all  ages  have  connected  with  Holy 
Baptism.  The  recipient  of  the  Sacrament  is  thereby  trans- 
ferred from  the  natural  relation  established  by  creation  to  the 
covenant  relation  established  by  adoption.  The  change  in  the 
spiritual  life  of  an  infant  is  somewhat  as  the  natural  birth  is  to 
the  physical  life.  Baptism  is  therefore  properly  called  the  new 
birth,  and  the  Reformers  in  making  and  maintaining  a  schism 
chiefly  because  of  our  Prayer  Book  doctrine  concerning  Re- 
generation disregard  both  Scripture  and  reason. 

4.  The  teaching  of  our  Liturgy  regarding  the  spiritual  re- 
ce})tion  of  Christ  in  the  Bread  and  Wine  of  the  Holy  Com- 
munion is  also  eminently  Scriptural.  For,  on  the  night  in 
which  He  was  betrayed,  "  Jesus  took  bread  and  blessed  it  and 
brake  it  and  gave  it  to  the  Disciples  and  said,  Take,  eat,  this  is 
My  Body.  And  He  took  the  cup  and  gave  thanks  and  gave  it 
to  them,  saying.  Drink  ye  all  of  it  for  this  is  My  Blood  of  the 
New  Testament  which  is  shed  for  many,  for  the  remission  of 

The  Reformed  Episcopalians  -are  very  much  like  those 


sins. 


Jews  who  strove  among  themselves  saying,  "How  can  this 
man  give  us  His  Flesh  to  eat ;"  but  Jesus  said  unto  them, 
"  "C'erily,  verily,  I  say  unto  you,  except  ye  eat  the  Flesh  of  the 
Son   of  Man  and  drink  His  Blood  ye  have  no  life  in  you. 


<;i| 


i 


APPENDICES. 


Whoso  eateth  My  Flesh  and  drinketh  My  Blood  hath  eternal 
life,  and  I  will  raise  him  up  at  the  last  day,  for  My  Flesh  is  meat 
indeed  and  My  Blood  is  drink  indeed.  He  that  eateth  My  Flesh 
and  drinketh  My  Blood  dwelleth  in  Me  and  I  in  him.  As  the 
living  Father  hath  sent  Me,  and  I  live  by  the  Father,  so  he  that 
eateth  Me,  even  he  shall  live  by  Me.  This  is  the  Bread  which 
came  down  from  Heaven  :  not  as  your  fathers  did  eat  manna, 
and  are  dead  :  he  that  eateth  of  this  Bread  shall  live  forever." 
And  St.  Paul  says,  "  The  Cup  of  blessing  which  we  bless,  is  it 
not  the  Communion  of  the  Blood  of  Christ?  The  Bread  which 
we  break,  is  it  not  the  Communion  of  the  Body  of  Christ?  " 

The  Princess  Elizabeth's  famous  reply  to  her  Theological 
inquisitors  is  true  of  the  old  Prayer  Book  of  our  Catholic  and 
Apostolic  Church,  not  only  so  far  as  its  doctrine  concerning  the 
Holy  Communion  is  concerned,  but  likewise,  in  principle,  of 
all  essential  points  in  which  the  Reformers  and  other  De- 
nominationalists  depart  hgm  it. 

"  Christ  is  the  Word  that  spake  it. 
He  took  the  bread  and  brake  it. 
And  what  the  Word  did  make  it, 
That  I  believe  and  take  it." 

The  Rev.  Dr.  Wm.  C.  Hopkins,  of  Toledo,  heard  Dr. 
Newton,  of  Philadelphia,  a  leader  of  the  Low  Church  party, 
say,  in  a  public  address,  that  Bishop  Cummins  had  expressed 
to  him  deep  regret  for  starting  the  Reformed  Episcopal 
Church,  and  acknowledged  that  his  doing  so  was  a  great 
mistake.  Many  other  low  Churchmen  in  refusing  to  follow 
his  lead  said  that  all  that  the  Reformed  Episcopal  Church 
affirmed  was  already  abundantly  affirmed  by  the  old  Church 
and  all  that  was  denied  is  already  abundantly  denied  by 
the  Denominations  ;  so  that  no  new  organization  was  needed 
for  either  the  affirmative  or  negative.  They  said  also  that 
the  old  Church  already  allowed  all  the  liberty  of  opinion 
that  the  lowest  Churchman  could  ask,  in  proof  of  which 
they  called   attention   to   the   fact  that  for   years   many   of 


EXTEMPORE   PRAYER   AXD    EXPERIENCE    MEETINGS.      459 

them  had  freely  denied  Apostolic  Succession  and  Baptismal 
Regeneration,  and  yet  continued  their  ministry  without  let  or 
hindrance.  So  that  this  was  the  most  causaless  of  all  the 
schisms,  and  ought  to  be  the  first  to  be  healed,  and  we  look 
forward  with  hope  to  the  day  when  the  little  band  of  separated 
brethren  will  return  to  the  fold,  and  of  them  and  us  there  shall 
be,  indeed,  "  one  fold  and  one  Shepherd." 


XIX. 

EXTEMPORE  PRAYER  AND  EXPERIENCE  MEETINGS, 

Lecture  VI;  Page  321. 

'T^HERE  are  many  who  have  derived  a  great  deal  of  blessing 
•*■  and  support  from  the  Prayer  and  Experience  Meetings. 
Not  a  few  of  these  are  almost  if  not  quite  persuaded  that, 
being  English  speaking  people,  they  ought  to  be  in  commun- 
ion with  the  Historic  Catholic  Church  of  their  race.  But  they 
hesitate  in  transferring  their  allegiance  because  they  fear  that 
her  Liturgical  Services  would  not  meet  their  spiritual  wants. 
Such  will  be  glad  to  know  that  there  is  no  law  to  prevent 
Episcopalians  from  meeting  together  to  join  in  extempore 
prayer  and  to  strengthen  themselves  and  encourage  one 
another  by  the  relation  of  their  religious  experience.  The 
regular  Services  of  the  Church  are  of  course  stereotyped,  but 
they  are  scarcely  more  so  than  those  of  the  various  non-litur- 
gical Denominations.  So  far  as  general  public  worship 
is  concerned  it  does  not  in  any  body  of  Christians  take  the 
place  of  the  Prayer  and  Experience  Meeting.  There  is,  how- 
ever, no  Denomination  in  which  it  comes  so  nearly  doing  so  as 
in  the  Episcopal  Church.  The  Laity  take  more  part  in  our 
regular  Sunday  services  than  they  do  in  those  of  any  other 
religious  body.  They  confess  their  shortcomings  and  sins; 
pray  for  forgiveness  and  help  ;  make  a  profession  of  Christ ; 
and,  in  the  Psalter,  even  tell  their  religious  experience.     True 


y 


:  ( 
■  'I 

'J 

\\\ 


I'V 


..I' 


II 


■^  !! 


460 


APPENDICES. 


they  do  this  by  conforming  to  the  postures  and  joining  their 
voices  with  the  rest  of  the  congregation,  but  we  trust  that 
the  prayers,  confessions,  professions  and  experiences  which 
Episcopalians  say  in  concert,  are  no  less  helpful  than  those 
of  the  hymns  which  all  Christians  are  accustomed  to  sing 
together. 

It  is  true  that  taking  part  in  precomposed  Services  does 
not  afford  so  much  of  an  opportunity  to  individuals  of  taking 
up  their  cross,  but  what  is  lost  in  this  respect  is  more  than 
compensated  for  by  the  removal  of  a  stumbling-block  which 
accounts  for  a  large  element  in  our  non  church  member  popu- 
lation. So  much  importance  has  been  attached  to  the  class 
meeting  that  taking  part  in  it  has  come  popularly  to  be 
regarded  as  a  prerequisite  to  Church  membership  in  good 
standing,  and  the  degree  of  spirituality  is  judged  of  by  the 
ability  to  pray  and  talk  in  public.  In  every  congregation 
there  are  some  whose  piety  is  overestimated,  because  of  the 
ease  with  which  they  meet  these  requirements  ;  while  that  of 
others  is  unjustifiably  discounted,  owing  to  the  lack  of  fluency 
and  self-assertion  which  puts  them  at  a  disadvantage.  The 
representatives  of  the  latter  of  these  classes  who  in  many 
cases  exhibit  the  choicest  fruits  of  Christianity,  regard  the 
cross  which  they  are  called  upon  to  take  up  as  being  too 
heavy  for  them  to  bear.  The  great  majority  of  these  would 
g'ladly  make  use  of  the  means  of  grace  which  Christ  and  the 
Apostles  instituted  for  their  admittance  to  the  Church  and 
upbuilding  in  righteousness,  but  they  cannot  meet  the  require- 
ments of,  say,  John  Wesley  and  his  followers,  and  so  to  their 
regret  they  feel  that  they  must  remain  unafllliated  with  any 
body  of  Christians.  All  such  will  find  the  Apostolic  Church 
of  the  English  speaking  race  the  place  for  them. 

This  great  historic  Communion  does  not  put  a  yoke  upon 
the  humble  and  shrinking  which  they  are  not  able  to  bear. 
Baptism,  of  which  Confirmation  is  the  completion,  and  the  Holy 
Communion,  are  the  Gospel  ordinances  for  the  confession  of 


VESTMENTS A    LAYMAN    ON. 


461 


Christ.  The  reception  of  these  upon  the  simple  conditions 
imposed  in  all  ages  by  the  Catholic  Church,  namely,  a  public 
promise  by  God's  help  to  renounce  the  Devil  and  all  his 
works ;  to  believe  all  the  articles  of  the  Apostles'  Creed  ;  and 
to  keep  God's  holy  will  and  Commandments,  is  all  that  any 
person  or  society  has  a  right  to  require  of  those  who  desire 
to  identify  themselves  with  the  Savior  and  His  Kingdom. 

But  if  there  be  any  Episcopalian  who  finds  that  the  regular 
institutions  and  worship  of  his  Church  do  not  meet  his  spirit- 
ual needs,  he  is  at  perfect  liberty  to  resort  to  extemporary 
prayer.  And  if  the  use  of  it  in  his  closet  and  the  relation  of 
his  experience  in  private  conversation  with  his  household  and 
particular  friends  will  not  suflBce,  there  is  no  reason  why  he 
should  not  organize  a  class  of  any  who  sympathize  with  him. 
This  is  what  John  Wesley  did.  In  view  of  this  representation, 
we  trust  that  none  who  are  convinced  of  this  Church's  superior 
claims  to  their  allegiance  will  hesitate  to  identify  themselves 
with  her,  because  her  regular  public  worship  is  liturgical. 


^■' 


XX. 


VESTMENTS— A  LAYMAN  ON. 
Lecture  VI;  Page  324. 

A    FTER  reading  the  section  concerning  the  use  of  Eccle- 

'^^     siastical    Vestments  a    thoughtful    Layman    was   good 

enough  to  give  me  the  following  excellent  criticism: 

"  You  might  have  added  that  the  vestments  form  not  only 
a  fitting  attire,  placing  the  Clergyman  in  harmony  with  the 
underlying  spirit  of  the  Service,  but  they  also  *  conceal  the 
varying  fashions  of^men'  and  are  a  great  protection  to  the 
Laity  against  the  personal  kinks  of  their  Rector.  The  latter 
may  wear  a  sack  or  a  dress  coat,  but  whichever  it  is  the  over- 
lying cassock  and  surplice  hide  it.  If — as  a  minister  in  a 
religious  body  not  Episcopal  was  said  to  have  done  —  he  comes 
into  the  Church  with  his  pants  tucked  into  the  top  of  boots, 


n 


I 


I 


Is! 


!  ' 


II 


"il 


APPENDICES. 


the  fact  that  he  does  this  is  not  manifest ;  but,  in  the  case  just 
alluded  to,  the  congregation  were  helpless  and  would  have 
been  so  if  he  had  worn  a  green  coat.  The  vestments  insure 
respect  for  the  dignity  of  worship,  as  well  as  for  the  rights  of 
the  Laity,  and  does  this  without  trespassing  upon  the  liberty 
of  the  Clerffv." 


XXI. 

DANCING,  CARD  PLAYING  AND  THEATRE  GOING. 
Leotube  VI ;  Page  326. 

A  T  a  Mission  held  in  one  of  the  county-seats  of  the  Diocese 
'^^^  of  Ohio,  where  the  Church  had  been  newly  established, 
tlie  Missioner  encouraged  the  people  to  ask  questions  about 
points  concerning  which  they  would  like  to  know  more.  Free- 
dom of  inquiry  was  secured  by  the  placing  of  a  box  near  the 
door  into  which  unsigned  questions  might  be  deposited.  One 
evening,  among  other  inquiries,  it  contained  this :  "  You  say 
that  in  order  to  become  a  member  of  the  Episcopal  Church  a 
person  has  to  'Renounce  the  Devil  and  all  his  works,  the 
pomps  and  vanity  of  this  wicked  world  and  all  the  sinful  lusts 
of  the  flesh.'  Query :  Does  dancing,  card  playing  and  the* 
atre  going  fall  under  any  of  these  heads?  If  so,  why  are  not 
Episcopalians  who  indulge  in  them  excommunicated?  " 

In  his  answer,  which  in  that  community  silenced  much  cavil- 
ing at  the  Church,  the  Missioner,  as  nearly  as  I  can  remember, 
said  :  "  I  confess  to  a  little  surprise  at  this  question.  Indeed, 
if  it  were  not  for  some  things  which  have  come  to  the  surface 
in  the  course  of  certain  conversations  which  I  have  had  since 
my  coming  among  you,  I  could  hardly  believe  that  it  is  asked  in 
the  right  spirit.  To  one  raised  as  I  have  been  it  seems  almost 
incredible  that  any  one  should  seriously  contend  that  pro- 
fessing Christians  who  participate  in  these  amusements  merit 
the  extreme  penalty  of  excommunication.     But   in   view   of 


DANCING,    CARD    PLAYING    AND   THEATRE    GOING. 


463 


what  I  have  heard,  there  seems  to  be  a  necessity  for  treating 
liiis  inquiry  with  the  same  respect  that  others  which  appeared 
more  reasonable  received. 

"  People  are  so  constituted  that  they  must  have  a  little 
recreation.  There  is  a  proverb  to  the  effect  that  all  work  and 
no  play,  if  long  continued,  will  inevitably  have  a  bad  effect 
upon  both  body  and  mind.  The  universal  recognition  of  this 
accounts  for  the  fact  that  no  body  of  Christians  forbids  all 
diversions  to  its  adherents.  The  only  difference  therefore  be- 
tween Episcopalians  and  their  criticisers  is  in  the  matter  of 
regulation.  One  resorts  to  legislation,  while  the  other  leaves 
it  to  the  conscience  of  its  members. 

"  The  Episcopal  Church  of  course  expects  all  her  adherents 
to  keep  their  Baptismal  vows.  But  so  far  as  adults  are  con- 
cerned she  treats  them  as  men  and  women,  and  not  like 
children,  and  so  she  allows  them  to  determine  for  themselves 
what  ate  to  be  included  among  the  things  which  they  have 
promised  to  renounce.  As  for  the  boys  and  girls  she  leaves 
their  parents  and  spiritual  masters  and  teachers  to  determine 
what  amusements  they  shall  enjoy. 

*'  Now  where  such  liberty  of  conscience  is  allowed  there  is 
of  course  always  more  or  less  of  diversity  in  opinion  and  prac- 
tice. This  accounts  for  the  fact  that  there  are  Episcopalians 
who  from  conscientious  scruples  do  not  dance,  play  cards  or 
attend  theatres.  Some  of  our  ministers  openly  discourage 
these  things,  and  even  those  who  see  no  harm  in  them  strongly 
recommend  moderation.  However,  they  also  do  this  in  re- 
spect to  all  amusements  which  are  likely  to  absorb  too  much 
time  and  attention. 

"  The  character  of  one's  amusements  when  he  is  at  liberty  to 
choose  for  himself,  is  largely  a  matter  "of  taste.  I  am  sorry  to 
say  that  my  j)arents  were  not  professing  Christians  and  that  I 
was  not  a  Church  member  until  after  I  had  reached  the  estate 
l»f  manhood.  I  therefore  felt  perfectly  free  to  dance,  play 
cards  or  attend  the  circus  —  there  was  no  theatre  or  opera  in 


1^ 


111 


1 


i«i'| 


'v^HMiflp^iflCi 


APPENDICES. 


the  town  near  the  rural  community  where  I  lived.  I  also  fre- 
quented the  inevitable  Church  social  and  joined  without  com- 
punction of  conscience  in  the  various  romping  and  kissing 
games.  I  will  not  say  that  I  did  not  enjoy  them,  but  I  always 
contended,  and  I  have  not  up  to  date  seen  any  reason  to 
change  my  mind,  that  if  I  had  a  sister  I  should  rather  have 
her  go  to  a  select  dancing  party  or  the  circus  —  opera  much 
preferred  if  there  be  any  —  than  to  attend  the  old  time  Church 
social  or  mite  society. 

"  If  some  of  the  Churches  which  expressly  prohibit  dancing, 
card  playing  and  theatre  going  were  to  excommunicate  all 
those  of  their  membership  who  disregard  the  law,  there  would 
Be  many  empty  pews  in  their  places  of  worship.  The  mem- 
bers of  the  Episcopal  Church  are  by  no  means  the  only  pro- 
fessing Christians  who  take  part  in  the  amusements  against 
which  the  writer  of  the  question  seems  to  be  so  deeply 
prejudiced.  In  fact  I  have  often  observed  that  the  various 
bodies  of  Christians  are  generally  pretty  evenly  represented 
at  such  parties  and  entertainments,  and  that  Episcopalians  are 
not  always  the  ones  who  are  most  carried  away  by  them.  On 
the  contrary,  the  conduct  of  those  who  do  these  things  regard- 
less of  the  regulations  of  the  Denomination  to  which  they  be- 
long, often  furnishes  an  iUwstration  of  the  truth  of  the  prover- 
bial saying,  *  Stolen  waters  are  sweeter  than  any  other.'  " 


THE  EPISCOPAL  CHURCH  THE  CHURCH  OF  THE  POOR. 

Lecture  TI;  Page  330. 

'HPHIS  is  the  testimony  of  the  Rev.   Dr.  Jackson,   the  elo- 
quent  and  candid  Pastor  of  the  Wesleyan  Chapel,  Co- 
lumbus, Ohio. 

"If  time   permitted   I  would  like  to   speak  at  length  in 
praise  of  the  work  of  the  Episcopal  Church  among  the  poor, 


THE    CHURCH    OF    THE   POOR. 


465 


Although  that  Communion  has  perhaps  the  highest  percentage 
of  wealth  per  member  of  any  Church  in  this  country,  yet  the 
poor  have  they  always  with  them.  To  the  solution  of  the 
problems  of  poverty  they  have  given  much  of  their  best  thought 
and  energy.  Although  numerically  among  the  smallest,  yet 
they  lead  among  the  Protestant  Churches  of  America  in  the 
erection  of  hospitals,  the  foundation  of  charities,  and  in  the 
organization  of  various  sisterhoods,  guilds,  brotherhoods  and  the 
like,  for  the  alleviation  of  human  distress.  Their  Parish  and 
Cathedral  system  for  our  great  cities,  with  their  Parish  Houses, 
is  the  only  sensible  and  practical  plan  yet  devised  for  bringing 
the  whole  force  of  the  Church  to  bear  for  the  relief  of  our  over- 
crowded tenement  house  population.  The  Methodist  Epis- 
copal Church,  while  theoretically  the  best  organized,  next  to 
the  Catholics,  for  united  attack  upon  the  evils  of  our  great 
cities,  is  yet,  practically,  owing  to  our  compulsory  system  of 
pastoral  change  by  the  almanac,  and  the  ruinous  competi- 
tion encouraged  between  our  congregations,  weakly  and 
criminally  negligent  and  utterly  inefficient." 

The  custom  of  fashionable  dressing  in  all  "  the  churches  " 

has  done  more  than  anything  else  to  exclude  the  poor  from 

public  worship,  but  this  is  the  misfortune  of  all  Denominations 

alike,  and  its  correction  is  a  problem    only  partially  solved 

by  our  various  City  Missions.     One  thing  is  certain  that  all 

respectable   poor  people  faithfully   attending  the   Episcopal 

Church  are  sure  of  a  warm  and  permanent  welcome. 

"Our  Mother,  the  Church,  hath  never  a  child 

To  honor  before  the  rest, 
And  she  singeth  the  same  for  mighty  kings 

And  the  veriest  babe  on  her  breast; 
And  the  Bishop  goes  down  to  his  narrow  bed 

As  the  ploughman's  child  is  laid, 
And  alike  she  blesseth  the  dark-brow'd  serf, 

And  the  chief  in  his  robe  arrayed. 
She  sprinkles  the  drops  of  the  bright  new-birth, 

The  same  on  the  low  and  high, 
And  christens  their  bodies  with  dust  to  dust, 

When  earth  with  its  earth  must  lie." 
C.  A.— 30 


F 


m 


I  1. 


466 


APPENDICES. 


XXIII. 

FERMENTED  COMMUNION  WJNE,  OBJECTION 

TO,  CONSIDERED. 

Lecture  VII;  Page  355. 

SINCE  tlie  pnblication  of  the  First  Edition  of  this  book,  I 
have  met  with  some  excellent  people  who,  after  connect- 
ing themselves  with  a  newly  organized  Mission,  had  compunc- 
tion of   conscience   about   coming   to   the  Holy  Communion 
because  the  Church  requires  fermented  wine  to  be  used  in  its 
administration.     This    led    to    considerable    conversation  and 
inquiry,   which  convinced  me    that    the    law   regulating   this 
matter  is  a  stumbling-block  to   many  whose  total  abstinence 
pledge  forbids  them  the  use  of  wine  except  for  medicinal  pur- 
poses.    There  are  doubtless  some  of  these  in  almost  every 
community.     In  view  of  the  gigantic  evils  growing  out  of  the 
use  of  alcoholic  drinks,  those  who  do  what  they  can  to  stem  the 
tide  of  degradation  and  sorrow  by  observing  the  precept  to 
"touch  not,  taste  not"  and  "handle  not,"  and  by  inducing 
others  to  follow  their  example,  must  command  the  profound 
respect  of  all  thoughtful  men  and  women.     Can  such  receive 
the  Holy  Communion  in  the  Episcopal  Church  without  doing 
violence  to  their  noble  conscientious  scruples?     It  would  be 
8  matter  for  great  regret  if  this  question  could  not  be  satis, 
factorily  answered  in  the  affirmative.     How  then  can  any  one> 
who  is  pledged  to  total  abstinence  justify  himself  in  receiving 
the  Holy  Communion  in  a  Church  that  uses  fermented  wine 
and  does  not  permit  anything  else  to  be  substituted? 

In  our  answer  to  this  question  we  would  call  attention  to 
the  fact  that  those  who  have  signed  total  abstinence  pledges 
generally  feel  at  liberty  to  use  wine  or  even  pure  alcohol  for 


FERMENTED   COMMUNION    WINE. 


467 


medicinal  purposes.  And  surely  if  the  pledge  may  be  set 
aside  by  a  human  physician's  prescription  in  the  case  of  bodily 
sickness,  it  may  be  done  by  the  prescription  of  the  Divine 
Physician  for  our  spiritual  illness.  But,  it  will  be  asked,  did 
our  Lord  prescribe  fermented  wine  by  using  it  at  the  institu- 
tion of  the  Holy  Communion  on  the  night  of  His  betrayal  ? 
We  think  that  there  can  be  no  reasonable  doubt  that  He  did. 

In  the  General  Convention  of  a.  d.  1886,  the  House  of 
Bishops  passed  a  resolution  declaring  that  the  use  of  unfer- 
mented  wine  was  "  unwarranted  by  the  example  of  our  Lord, 
and  contrary  to  the  custom  of  the  Catholic  Church."  The 
Lambeth  Conference  of  a.  d.  1888  more  strongly  affirmed  the 
same  position  in  the  following  resolution  :  "  That  the  Bishops 
assembled  in  this  conference  declare  that  the  use  of  unfer- 
mented  juice  of  the  grape  or  any  other  liquid  other  than  true 
Wine  diluted  or  undiluted,  as  the  element  in  the  Administra- 
tion of  the  Cup  in  Holy  Communion,  is  unwarranted  by  the 
example  of  our  Lord  and  is  an  unauthorized  departure  from 
the    custom  of  the    Catholic  Church." 

In  an  editorial  on  the  first  Lord's  Supper  The  Congrega- 

tionalist  thus  admirably  sums  up  the  reasons  why  we  must 

accept  it  as  a  fact  that  the  wine  used  was  fermented: 

"  The  Jews  had  no  scientific  knowledge  intimating  the 
fermentation  of  bread  and  wine  to  be  identical.  The  Jerusa- 
lem Talmud  distinctly  orders  the  Passover  service  to  be  cele- 
brated with  red  wine,  which  is  necessarily  fermented.  The 
Talmud  limited  the  quantity  to  such  a  degree  as  clearly  to 
show  the  prevention  of  drunkenness  to  be  the  object.  Vinegar 
was  used  at  the  Passover  table,  showing  that  vinous  fermenta- 
tion was  not  prohibited.  To  this  may  be  added  the  opinions 
of  Dr.  Edersheim,  a  Christian  of  Jewish  lineage  and  an  emi- 
nent graduate  of  Oxford,  singularly  -familiar  with  the  Tal- 
muds  and  the  entire  Hebrew  literature,  who  says :  '  The 
contention  that  this  was  unfermented  wine  is  not  worth  dis- 

* 

cussion.'  All  the  testimony  of  the  most  eminent  Jewish 
Rabbis  of  our  day  is  also  in  this  direction." 

Those  who  have  total  abstinence  vows  resting  upon  them 


I 


r 


III 
liil' 


1 


may  ilierefore  come  to  the  Lord's  Supper  in  the  Episcopal 
Church,  because  in  doing  so  they  will  be  rendering  obedi- 
#nce  to  the  Great  Physician  of  their  souls.    As  the  late  Bishop 
of    Pennsylvania   said    to   one    who   hesitated,   because  of  a 
pledge,   to  receive  the  Communion,  and  sought   his   Godly 
advice    and  counsel:    "Our  Blessed  Lord  used  the  ordinary 
wine  of  the  country  at  the  institution  of  the  Lord's  Supper. 
In  His  Divine  omniscience  He  looked  through  all  the  future, 
and  saw  every  possible  consequence  of  such  an  act.     Yet  He 
deliberately  chose  the  *  blood  of  the  grape,'  when  He  would 
symbolize  the  Blood  of  the  Cross,  and,  in  His  infinite  wisdom, 
which  can  do  no  wrong,  ordained  that  it  should  be  used  in  all 
places  and  ages,  and  among  all  conditions  of  men  as  the  one 
Divine  way  of  celebrating  the  Lord's  Supper.     To  hesitate 
at  taking  a  small  sip  of  wine  from  the  Chalice,  because  it  is 
used  by  others  for  intoxicating  purposes,  is  to  reflect  on  our 
Blessed  Lord's  wisdom  and  goodness  and  love  and  purity,  and 
to  affect  to  be  purer  and  holier  than  He.     The  Lord  Jesus,  if 
you    take    the  wine   in   His  strength  and    at  His  command, 
will  keep  you  from  an  evil  consequence  to  yourself  and  others; 
whereas,  disobedience  to  His  command  dishonors  Him,  insults 
Him;  sets  up  your  judgment  against  His,  and  will  put  your 
own  self-will  above  the  positive  command  'drink  ye   all  of 

this.'  " 

One  of  the  persons  with  whom  I  conversed  about  this 
matter  argued  that  it  was  wrong  to  use  fermented  wine, 
because  newly  converted  men  who  had  fallen  into  the  drinking 
habit  would  have  their  almost  irresistible  cravings  for  intoxi- 
cants revived  by  the  taste  of  it.  But  I  happened  to  be  able 
to  cite  an  instance  from  my  own  pastoral  experience  which 
goes  to  show  that  there  is  not  much  in  this.  He  was  an  attrac- 
tive young  man,  for  whom  his  parents  and  lovely  wife  had  a 
great  deal  of  anxiety.  After  much  hesitancy  due  to  fear  that 
he  would  bring  reproach  to  the  Church,  he  finally  yielded 
to  the  persuasion  of  one  of  his  companions  who  was  a  Church- 


V 


THE    DECLARATION    OF    INDEPENDENCE. 


469 


man  and  was  confirmed.  There  were  some  misgivings  about 
the  result  of  his  coming  to  the  Holy  Communion,  but  it  did  not 
occur  to  me  or  to  any  one  else  to  use  unfermented  grape 
juice  or  some  other  substitute  for  wine.  The  friend  who  in- 
duced him  to  come  into  the  Church  afterwards  asked  him 
whether  he  thought  that  there  was  any  danger  connected  with 
the  taking  of  the  Sacramental  wine,  to  which  he  confidently 
replied,  no.  He  then  went  on  to  explain  why  he  had  no  fear. 
In  the  first  place,  he  went  to  the  Altar  for  help  to  enable 
him  to  overcome  his  besetting  sin  and  he  did  not  go  in  vain. 
Moreover,  there  was  scarcely  any  resemblance  in  taste  between 
the  light  diluted  wine  received  from  the  Chalice  and  the 
strong  drink  which  overcame  him,  for  the  latter  contained  a 
large  percentage  of  alcohol,  while  the  former  has  almost  none 
at  all. 


.1*  r 


•/s 


XXIV. 


THE  DECLARATION   OF  INDEPENDENCE  AND  THE 

FAITH  OF  ITS  SIGNERS. 

Lecture  VII ;  Page  378. 

C  JGNERS  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence : 
*^  New    Hampshire  —  Josiah    Bartlett,    Congregation - 

alist ;    William    H.    Whipple,    Congregationalist ;    Matthew 
Thornton,  Congregationalist. 

Massachusetts  —  John  Hancock,  Congregationalist ;  John 
Adams,  Congregationalist ;  Samuel  Adams,  Congregationalist; 
Robert  Treat  Paine,  Congregationalist ;  Elbridge  Gerry, 
Episcopalian. 

Rhode  Island  —  Stephen  Hopkins,  Quaker;  William  Ellery, 
Congregationalist. 

Connecticut  — Roger  Sherman,  Congregationalist ;  Samuel 
Huntington,  Congregationalist ;  William  Williams,  Congre- 
gationalist ;  Oliver  Wolcott,  Congregationalist. 

New  York  —  William  Floyd,  Presbyterian ;  Philip  Liv- 
ingstone, Episcopalian  ;  Francis  Lewis,  Episcopalian  ;  Lewis 
Morris,  Episcopalian. 


I 


!| 


470 


APPENDICES. 


New  Jersey  — Richard  Stockton,  Quaker  ;  John  Wither- 
spoon,  Presbyterian  ;  Francis  Hopkinson,  Episcopalian  ;  John 
Hart,  Baptist ;  Abraham  Chirk,  Presbyterian. 

Pennsylvania  —  Robert  Morris,  Episcopalian  ;  Benjamin 
Rush,  Episcopalian  ;  Benjamin  Franklin,  Episcopalian  ;  John 
Morton.  Episcopalian  ;  George  Clymer,  Episcopalian  ;  James 
Smith,  Presbyterian ;  George  Taylor.  Episcopalian  ;  James 
Wilson,  Episcopalian  ;  George  Ross,  Episcopalian. 

Delaware— Caesar  Rodney,  Episcopalian;  George  Read, 
Episcopalian  ;  Thomas  McKean,  Presbyterian. 

Maryland  —  Samuel  Chase,  Episcopalian;  Thomas  Stone, 
Episcopalian  ;  William  Paca,   Episcopalian  ;   Charles  Carroll, 

Roman  Catholic. 

Virginia  — George  Wythe,  Episcopalian  ;  Richard  Henry 
Lee,  Episcopalian  ;  Thomas  Jefferson,  Episcopalian;  Benja- 
min  Harrison,  Episcopalian;  Thomas  Nelson,  Jr.,  Episco- 
palian ;  Francis  Lightfoot  Lee,  Episcopalian ;  Carter  Braxton, 

Episcopalian. 

North   Carolina.— William  Hooper,  Episcopalian;  Joseph 

Hewes,  Episcopalian;  John  Penn,  Episcopalian. 

South  Carolina.—  Edward  Rutledge,  Episcopalian;  Thomas 
Heyward,  Jr.,  Episcopalian;  Thomas  Lynch,  Jr.,  Episcopalian; 
Arthur  Middleton,  Episcopalian. 

Georgia.— Button  Gwinnett,  Episcopalian;  Lyman  Hall, 
Congregationalist;  George  Walton,  Episcopalian. 

Signatures  were  affixed  to  the  Declaration  on  July  4  and 
August  2,  1776.  Several  members  of  Congress  who  voted 
for,  or  while  present  strongly  favored  the  Declaration  did  not, 
for  one  or  another  good  reason,  have  an  opportunity  of  signing 
it.  Among  such  there  were  five  Congregational ists,  one 
Presbyterian,  one  Dutch  Reformed,  one  Quaker  and  thirteen 
Episcopalians.  The  members  of  the  Episcopal  Church  of 
whom  this  is  true  are  :  John  Alsop,  John  Jay,  James  Duane, 
Robert  R.  Livingston,  Jr.,  Henry  Wisner,  Edward  Biddle, 
Thomas  Willing,  Robert  Goldsborough,  John  Hall,  Matthew 
Tilghman,  Thomas  Johnson,  Jr.,  John  Rutledge  and  Archi- 
bald Bullock. 

In  view  of  this  showing  and  that  of  Appendix  VL,  page 
413,  it  is  surpassingly  strange  that  Congregationalists,  on  the 


Nf 


PERPETUITY. 


471 


one  hand,  and  on  the  other,  Romanists,  try  to  make  it  appear 
that  the  credit  of  laying  the  foundations  of  our  Independence 
and  Republican  Government  is  due  chiefly  to  their  sons.  But, 
surely,  if  the  representatives  of  either  of  these  bodies  of 
Christians  had  any  ground  for  their  pretension.  Episcopalians 
would  not  have  predominated  so  greatly  among  the  makers 
and  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  and  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States.  The  first  of  these  instruments 
was  signed  by  twelve  Congregationalists  and  one  Roman 
Catholic,  and  the  second  by  five  Congregationalists  and  two 
Roman  Catholics.  But  thirty-six  Episcopalians  had  the  im- 
perishable honor  of  subscribing  their  names  to  the  first  of  these 
documents  and  twenty-seven  to  the  second. 

As  of  late  years  Romanists  have  been  making  such 
astounding  claims,  we  are  justified  in  going  a  little  out  of  our 
way  to  call  especial  attention  to  a  fact  which  must  be  humili- 
ating to  them,  namely,  that  Charles  Carroll,  the  only  one  of 
their  faith  whose  name  appears  among  the  signers  of  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  was  a  pew  renter  and  an  at- 
tendant of  the  Episcopal  Church. 


PERPETUITY: 


XXV. 

AN  ADDITIONAL  REASON  FOR  BEING  AN 
EPISCOPALIAN. 


Lecture  VII ;  Page  386. 

ONE  of  the  considerations  which  will  induce  many  to  iden- 
tify themselves  with  the  Episcopal  Church  rather  than 
with  any  other  body  of  Protestant  Christians,  grows  out  of  the 
fact  that  the  long  continuance  and  present  condition  of  this 
Church  are  a  guarantee  of  her  perpetuity.  There  is  a  strong  de- 
sire on  the  part  of  most  thoughtful  men  to  ally  themselves  with 
the  permanent  and  to  avoid  the  ephemeral.  The  Scriptural 
proverb    "no    man    also  having  drunk  old  wine  straightway 


n 


11 

i 


472 


APPENDICES. 


clesireth  new,  for  he  saith  the  old  is  better  "  expresses  a  deep- 
rooted  and  far-reaching  instinct,  which  as  time  goes  on  will 
tell  more  and  more  upon  the  growth  of  the  Episcopal  Church. 
Of  two  or  more  institutions  claiming  the  allegiance  of  men  and 
women,  the  one  which  gives  the  greatest  promise  of  durability 
will,  other  things  being  equal,  in  the  long  run  gain  the  day. 
In  view  of  what  has  been  said  in  other  connections  it  cannot 
foe  denied  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is  at  least  as  Scriptural, 
as  pure  and  as  useful  as  any  other  Christian  body.  This 
being  the  case,  if  she  can  be  shown  to  be  more  enduring  than 
her  rivals,  that,  in  itself,  will,  in  the  case  of  multitudes,  settle 
the  question  touching  the  superior  claims  of  allegiance. 

Now  the  very  fact  that  this  Church  has  existed  for  eigh- 
teen hundred  years,  certainly  proves  that  she  has  marvelous 
qualities  of  endurance.  Nor  does  she  yet  show  the  slightest 
signs  of  decay.  On  the  contrary  she  never  was  more  vigorous 
in  every  part  of  the  English  speaking  world  than  at  this  time. 
Those  who  identify  themselves  with  the  American  branch  of 
this  Communion  will  therefore  be  morally  certain  that  their 
influence  and  work  and  gifts  will  go  towards  the  upbuilding 
of  an  institution  which  will  continue  as  long  at  least  as  the 
English  civilization  lasts.  It  may  be  that  some  of  the  other 
Protestant  bodies  will  also  continue  through  many  centuries 
to  come,  but  the  history  of  sectarianism  is  against  the  proba- 
bility of  any  of  them  doing  so. 

Of  all  the  sects  that  arose  in  the  course  of  the  first  one 
thousand  years  of  the  Christian  Dispensation,  none  has  survived. 
If  Arianism,  the  greatest  of  them  all,  may  be  said  to  biB  an  ex- 
ception, its  feeble  condition  as  seen  in  the  Unitarian  body 
will  afford  no  encouragement  for  hope  that  the  Denomi- 
nations which  have  sprung  up  since  the  Reformation,  though 
they  be  ever  so  flourishing  at  this  time,  will  be  in  existence 
three  hundred  years  hence.  Where  are  the  sects  that  made 
such  a  stir  in  pre-Reformation  times,  the  Donatists,  the  Nova- 
tians,  the  Arians,  the  Cathari?     If  these  have  all  long  since 


CHIEF    BODIES    OF    PROTESTANT   CHRISTIANS. 


473 


died  out,  what  guarantee  of  perpetuity  can  any  post-Reforma- 
tion Denomination  offer  ?  Many  of  them  have  had  their  little 
day  already,  and  not  a  few  others  have  not  much  more  than  a 
name  to  live.  Even  the  most  flourishing  among  them  are 
comparatively  no  more  so  than  some  of  the  early  sects.  Their 
growth  has  not  been  any  more  rapid  or  substantial. 

There  is  therefore  no  reason  why  the  history  of  the  pre-Re- 
formation sects  should  not  repeat  itself  in  those  of  the  post-Re- 
formation period.  The  probabilities  are  entirely  on  the  side 
of  the  conclusion  that  at  the  end  of  the  next  four  or  five  hun- 
dred years  Lutheranism,  Congregationalism,  Presbyterianism, 
Baptistism  and  Methodism  will  be  things  of  the  past.  But 
while  this  in  the  light  of  history  is  the  outlook  of  sectarianism, 
the  prospects  are  that  the  Historic  Church  of  the  English 
speaking  race  will,  as  the  centuries  come  and  go,  grow  more 
powerful  and  useful  until  her  children  shall  be  in  numbers  as 
the  sand  by  the  seaside,  for  multitude,  and  her  blessing  shall 
cover  the  whole  earth. 

Thus,  if  Americans  choose  their  Church  relationship  with 
reference  to  the  probabilities  of  perpetuity,  there  is  nothing  for 
them  to  do  but  to  become  Episcopalians. 


XXVI. 

NEW    YORK    STATISTICS    OF    THE    CHIEF    BODIES    OF 
PROTESTANT   CHRISTIANS  IN  1895. 

Lecture  VII;  Page  393. 

Disciples 493 

Evangelical 800 

United  Presbyterian , 900 

Congregationalists 2,763 

Reformed 8,936 

Lutheran 11,632 

Methodist 14,657 

Baptist 15,110 

Presbyterian 22,313 

Episcopalian 43,689 


t 


APPENDICES. 


Tmpi    figures    are    furnished    by   the    New    York   city 
Mismon  Monthly,  a  Presbyterlta  publication.     The  following 

is  its  coiutnent : 

**  It  will  be  noticed  that  the  Episcopalians  far  outnumber 
any  other  denomination  in  their  membership.     Their  relative 


byterians  in  the  matter  of  Church  membership. 


XXVII. 

STATISTICS   OF  ENGLISH  SPEAKING   BODIES    OF 
CHRISTIANS  IN  THE   WORLD. 

Lecture  VII ;  Page  396. 

THE   following   estimates  by  M.  Fournier  de  Flaix,  pub- 
lished  in  IImi   "  Quarterly  dl  the  American   Statistical 

ilii»l>l«tillil^  Hi   March,  1892,  are  the  latest  that  have  been 

made  by  a  compelinl  tilfeority  : 

Episcoimlians   ;  •   ; ?u'^'^ 

Methodists  of  all  descriptions l^'oS^'Sv! 

Roman  Catholics jY't^'Sv^ 

Presbyterians  of  all  descriptions  \vAlX'X2; 

Baptists  of  all  descriptions ^I'XUX'XJSJ 


Congregationalists 
Free  Thinkers 


H,000,000 
4,500,000 

I^utheraiis - 9'?^'^ 

Unitarians ^Wnno 

Minor  Religious  Sects. it'S^'^ 

Of  no  particular  religion io,i)UO,»uu 

English  speaking  population 117,175,000 

The  overshadowinj^  preponderance  of  Episcopalians  in  the 
English  speaking  world  will  appear  still  plainer  when  it  is 
remembered  that  she  is  one  great,  closely-knit  Communion, 
while  the  various  other  bodies,  except  the  Roman  Catholics, 
are  broken  up  into  many  rival  sects.  For  example,  there  are  in 
America  alone  seventeen  Denominations  of  Methodists,  which 


I 


ENGLISH    SPEAKING   CHRISTIANS    IN   THE   WORLD.        475 

to  all  practical  purposes  are  as  separate  and  distinct  from  each 
other  as  Congregationalists  and  Baptists.  The  largest  by  far 
of  these  Wesleyan  bodies  reports  a  membership  of  less  than 
two  millions.  It  is  therefore  very  misleading,  when  compar- 
ino-  the  Anglican  Communion  with  the  followers  of  Wesley, 
to  say  that  the  former  has  twenty-eight  million  five  hundred 
thousand,  and  the  latter  eighteen  million  two  hundred  and 
fifty  thousand.  The  same  is  quite  as  true  of  Presbyterianism. 
So  far  as  numbers  are  concerned,  the  Romanists  really  come 
much  nearer  to  us  than  any  of  the  Protestant  Denominations, 
but  even  they  are  numerically  not  much  more  than  half  as 
strong;  while  in  other  elements  of  strength,  such  as  social, 
political,  and   commercial  influence,  they  fall   behind  much 

further. 

Moreover,  there  is  no  probability  that  either  Romanism  or 
Denominationalism  will  ever  overshadow  the  Historic  Catholic 
Church  of  our  race.  There"  have  been  periods  since  the 
Reformation  when  it  seemed  as  if  there  were  ground  for  fear 
first  that  the  one  and  then  the  other  might  do  so  ;  but  this  is 
far  from  being  the  case  now.  The  great  Anglican  Com- 
munion is  rapidly  recovering  from  the  prostrate  and  pitiable 
condition  to  which  she  was  brought  by  the  cooperation  of  her 
powerful  Papal  and  Puritanical  enemies,  who  after  abandon- 
ing her  in  great  numbers  used  their  immense  political  power 
to  keep  her  in  the  dust.  But  though  they  were  for  a  long 
time  successful,  she  finally  recovered  her  feet,  and  now  it  may 
be  said  of  her  :  "  God  even  thy  God  hath  annointed  thee  with 
the  oil  of  gladness  above  thy  fellows." 

That  this  is  true  of  the  English  branch  of  our  Communion, 
appears  from  the  following  extract  from  the  Schaff-Herzog 
Encyclopaedia  : 

''  During  the  century  the  vigorous  life  of  the  Church  has 
been  further  shown  by  the  restoration  of  Cathedrals  and  con- 
struction of  Churches,  in  the  creation  of  new  Episcopal  Sees  at 
home  and  the  rapid  extension  of  the  Church  and  Episcopate  in 
the  Colonies.     At  no  time  in  its  history  has  it  been  stronger 


fl 


476 


APPENDICES. 


and  more  vigorous  than  now  ;  more  alive  with  Theological 
discussion  and  achievement ;  more  competent  to  cope  with 
infidelity  ;  more  solicitous  to  relieve  the  poor  and  fallen  ;  more 
munificent  in  its  gifts  for  the  conversion  of  the  heathen,  or 
more  adapted  to  secure  the  esteem  and  gain  the  respect  of  the 
Anglo-Saxon  people." 

That  the  same  is  true  of  the  American  branch  of  our  Com- 
munion appears  from  what  a  writer  in  Harper's  Weekly  says  : 

"  The  Episcopal  Church  has  now  for  many  years  weighed 
far  more  in  public  estimation  than  is  indicated  by  its  very  mod- 
erate array  of  Communicants  and  Clergy  in  the  United  States. 
The  Church  in  America  stands  not  alone,  but  is  a  Province  of 
the  world-wide  Anglican  Communion,  and  borrows  as  well  as 
lends  importance  by  reason  of  that  association  and  kinship.  It 
derives  dignity  and  gathers  influence  from  its  roots  in  the  past, 
from  its  mediatory  position  between  the  great  Protestant 
bodies  and  the  historic  Churches,  from  its  steadfastness  among 
winds  of  doctrines,  from  its  venerable  order,  from  its  sobriety 
of  taste,  from  its  grave  splendor  of  public  worship,  from  ite 
widespread  and  devoted  work  among  the  poor,  and  from  its 
great  strength  at  centres  of  thought  and  influence." 

Nor  is  our  unparalleled  growth  in  the  British  Empire  and 
America  the  only  evidence  of  renewed  life  and  vigor.  We 
have  become  the  greatest  Missionary  agency  of  Christendom. 
There  are  at  this  time  nearly  one  hundred  of  our  Missionary 
Bishops  and  four  thousand  other  Missionaries  in  the  field. 
"  They  are  in  every  part  of  Europe,  Asia,  Africa,  South 
America  and  in  the  Isles  of  the  Sea.  Many  of  these  Bishops 
have  now  established  strong  Churches  which  are  themselves 
sending  out  Missionaries.  For  instance,  the  Bishop  of  Sierra 
Leone  has  an  entire  corps  of  black  Clergy  and  they  are  not 
only  self-supporting,  but  they  have  sent  twenty-eight  Mission- 
aries into  the  interior  of  Africa." 

Nothing  can  be  more  certain  than  that,  so  far  as  the  Eng- 
lish speaking  race  is  concerned,  the  prophecy  "  They  shall  be- 
come one  flock  and  one  Shepherd  "  is  destined  to  be  fulfilled 
in  the  Anglican  Communion.  It  will  not  be  until  after  the 
English  civilization  has  run  a  much  more  remarkable  course 
than  that  of  Rome,  that  a  New  Zealander  "  in  the  midst  of  a 
vast  solitude  shall  take  his  stand  on  a  broken  arch  of  London 


CATHOLIC. 


477 


Bridge  to  sketch  the  ruins  of  St.  Paul's."  In  the  meantime 
some  one  who  is  a  more  reliable  prophet  and  historian,  if  not 
a  more  brilliant  rhetorician  than  Lord  Macaulay,  will  record 
the  collapse  of  the  Papacy  and  the  names  of  defunct  Denomi- 
nations which  are  now  flourishing. 


XXVIIL 

CATHOLIC, 

Lecture  VII;  Page  347. 

I  WEAR  the  name  of  Christ,  my  God, 
So  name  me  not  from  man ! 
And  my  broad  country  Catholic, 

Hath  neither  tribe  nor  clan: 
Its  rulers  are  an  endless  line, 

Through  all  the  world  they  went, 
Commissioned  from  the  Holy  Hill 
Of  Christ's  sublime  ascent." 

Both  Romanists  and  Denominationalists  object  to  our  use 
of  the  word  "Catholic."  This  is  because  the  former  per- 
sistently claim,  and  the  latter  practically  concede,  the  designa- 
tion to  be  the  exclusive  property  of  the  Roman  Church. 
Romanists  call  themselves  "  Catholics,"  and  the  body  to  which 
they  belong  the  "  Catholic  Church."  Denominationalists  and 
not  a  few  thoughtless  Episcopalians  in  both  their  spoken  and 
written  utterances  often  politely  allow  this  usurpation.  It  is 
said  that  in  China  courtesy  requires  a  man  to  use  disparaging 
words  in  speaking  of  anything  belonging  to  himself  or  with 
which  he  is  connected,  so  that  if  he  were  asked  of  what  re- 
ligion he  was,  it  would  be  proper  for  him  to  answer :  The  miser- 
able superstition  to  which  I  an  addicted  is  so-and-so.  There 
is  a  large  and  increasing  element  in  the  Episcopal  Church  who 
cannot  conscientiously  carry  their  politeness  to  such  an  ex- 
treme.    We  feel  that  consistency  with  our  profession  of  faith 


478 


AFPKNDICBS. 


twi  a  regard  fm.  fftiHi,  »qii«fe  that  we  should  rather  protest 
against  the  exclusive  appropriation  by  Romanists  of  what  be- 
longs to  us  quite  as  much  as  to  them. 

We  profess  to  be  Catholics,  for  in  one  of  the  Creeds  we 
say,  *«I  believe  in  the  Holy  Catholic  Church,"  and  in  the 
ether,  "One  Catholic  an4  Apostolic  Church."  One  of  the 
Creeds  is  repeated  at  every  regular  Service  and  often  on  less 
formal  occasions.  If  the  Episcopal  Church  is  not  really 
Catholic  so  far  as  the  Faith  is  concerned,  and  Apostolic  m 
lespect  to  her  origin  and  government,  we  should  cease  to  repeat 

the  Creeds. 

Catholic  is  a  Greek  word,  which  literally  means  general  or 
universal,  but  this  is  not  its  entire  significance  in  the  Creeds. 
It  has  reference  there  to  the  doctrine  and  government  which 
were  universally  believed  and  accepted  by  the  Orthodox  dur- 
ing the  early  ages  of  Christianity.     The  Catholic  doctrine  was 
de'fined  by  the  Great  Ecumenical  Councils,  and  consists  of  the 
twelve  articles  which  were  first  condensed  into  the  Apostles 
Creed  and  afterwards  expanded  into  the  Nicene.     During  the 
Conciliary  period,  which  closed  with  the  year  680,  there  was  a 
great  deal  of  dispute  about  matters  of  doctrine,  but  there  was 
practical    unanimity    concerning    the    form    of  Ecclesiastical 
Government,  and  so  the  Creeds  contain  comparatively  little 
upon  the  subject,  in  fact   the  older  form    contains   nothing 
while  the  other   has  simply  the  word  *'  Apostolic."     This  is 
however  enough  to  abundantly  justify  the  conclusion  that  no 
organization  which  was  not  founded  by  the  Apostles  and  is 
not  governed  by  Bishops,  who  are  their  legitimate  successors 
in  Office,  has  a  right  to  call  itself  a  '^  Catholic  "  Church. 

Romanists  and  Denominationalists  define  the  term  "  Catho- 
lic "  very  difEerently.  The  former  makes  it  exclude  all  bodies 
of  Christians  except  the  Papal  Communion  and  include  all  the 
Roman  additions  to  "  The  Faith  once  delivered  to  the  Saints." 
According  to  the  latter,  it  embraces  all  Denominations  that 
acknowledge  the  Divinity  of  Christ  and  look  to  Him  for  Salva- 


CATHOLIC. 


479 


tion,  whether  they  adhere  to  the  whole  of  the    Ecumenical 
Creeds  and  discipline  or  not.     But  "  can  any  one,"  asks  Mr. 
Labagh,  "  be  so  demented  as  to  suppose  that  when  the  Primi- 
tive Christians  repeated  the  Apostles '   Creed  and  said,  '  I  be- 
lieve  in    the  Holy  Catholic    Church'    or  the    Nicene  Creed 
and   said,    *  I    believe    one    Catholic   and    Apostolic  Church ' 
they   embraced  in  that  language    the   whole    brood   of  Sec- 
taries that  either  then  existed  or  might  at  any  future  time 
arise,  and  at  the  present  time  flourish."     Both  Romanists  and 
Denominationalists  agree    that   "  Catholic "  is  a  synonym  for 
universal ;  but  the  one  applies  it  to  the  doctrines  and  govern- 
ment that  are  peculiar  to  the  Roman  Church,  while  the  other 
contends  that  every  sect  has  as  much  right  as  the  Church  of 
Rome  to  stamp  its  peculiarities  with  the  imprint  of  "  Catholic." 
Episcopalians  agree  with   Denominationalists  in  this  con- 
clusion, but  we  say  that  neither  is  right  in  supposing  that  the 
word    "Catholic"   in  the  Creeds  has  any  reference    whatso- 
ever to  their  respective  peculiarities.     On  the  contrary,  it  is 
not  a  justification,  but  a  condemnation  of  them.     We  glory  in 
the  fact  that,  if  judged  by  the  Ecumenical  Creeds,  our  Church 
has  no  uncatholic  peculiarities,  none  whatsoever.     This  is  true 
of  her  both  in  respect  to  doctrine  and  government.    Romanists 
and  Denominationalists  boast  of  their  doctrinal  and  govern- 
mental peculiarities,  we  of  our  freedom  from  them.     Pecu- 
liarities are  not  notes  of  Catholicity  but  rather  evidences  of 
sectarianism.      The  dogmas  of  Transubstantiation,  the  Imma- 
culate Conception,  the  Infallibility  of  the   Pope,  and  Papal 
Jurisdiction,  come  perilously  near  to  converting  the  Roman 
Church  into  a  mere   sect.       Many  think  that  so  long  as  that 
Church  persists  in  these  and  her  many- other  peculiar  heresies 
she  has  no  title  to  be  regarded  as  anything  more  than  a  sect. 
The  names  of  Denominationalists,  such,  for  example,  as  Pres- 
byterian, Baptist,  Methodist,  Congregationalist,  Seventh-day 
Adventist,  usually  mark  their  heretical  peculiarities  and  bear 
witness  to  their  sectarian  character. 


m 


APPExmoBS* 

That  tlie  Episcopal  CImrcl  Is  tlie  oiily  Christian  body  in 
this  country  to  which  the  word  "  Catholic  "  as  used  in  the 
Creeds  is  applicable,  appears  from  the  fact  that  she  has  no 
peculiarities  and  that  her  teaching  and  government  are  the 
same  as  those  which  always  have  prevailed.  The  remarkable 
fact  cannot  be  made  too  plain  that  at  this  time  our  Communion 
neither  teaches  nor  practices  any  essential  thing  which  is 
peculiar  to  herself.  If  this  statement,  which  no  Romanist  or 
Denominationalist  would  dare  to  make  of  the  communion  to 
which  he  adheres,  be  doubted,  let  him  who  calls  it  in  question 
name  so  much  as  one  doctrine  of  this  Church  that  is  not  to-day 
taught  by  the  majority  of  Christians.  He  who  undertakes  to 
do  this  will  enter  upon  an  interesting  trend  of  investigation 
which  will  ultimately  bring  him  into  the  Episcopal  Church ; 
for  not  only  will  the  truth  of  our  representation  be  confirmed, 
but  the  attractiveness  of  a  Church  devoid  of  peculiarities  will 
become  irresistible. 


"Ancient  prayer,  and  song  liturgic. 
Creeds  that  change  not  to  the  end, 
As  His  gifts  we  have  received  them. 
As  His  charge  we  will  defend." 


I 


REFERENCES    TO    QUOTATIONS. 


The  Lectures  in  their  original  form  were  written  for  the 
class  room,  not  for  publication;  and  even  when,  after  the 
lapse  of  several  years,  the  work  was  prepared  for  the  press, 
there  was  no  expectation  that  it  would  be  read  by  Clergymen 
and  learned  Laymen,  who  might  want  to  verify  and  use  its 
statements  in  their  articles  and  books.  Hence  it  was  decided 
to  omit  the  localizing  foot-notes  which  increase  and  disfigure 
the  pages  of  more  pretentious  volumes  and  are  passed  over  by 
the  ordinary  reader.  Accordingly  no  record  of  quotations 
was  kept.  The  compiling  of  this  Index  has  been  therefore 
no  little  undertaking,  and  it  was  found  to  be  practically  im- 
possible to  make  it  entirely  complete.  However,  special  pains 
.  have  been  taken  to  trace  to  their  source  all  quotations  which  are 
likely  to  prove  of  any  value  to  those  who  have  represented 
that  a  list  of  references  would  be  helpful  to  them  and  others. 

PAGES 

4,  85th  line,  Oldroyd,  Continuity  of  the  English  Church  through   Eighteen 
Centuries,  inside  of  front  cover.  ^      ^-igutccu 

9,  15th  line,  Barrett,  The  Churchman's  Scrap-Book,  n  48 
I?'  l^it?   ?"^'  S*^^J^^'  Prebendary,  Church  Government,  p.' 14. 
H'  i^JJ?  i?"®'  5P-^®^^'  Apollos,  or  the  Way  of  God,  p.  94. 
iS'  ?^u^/^"®vy•  ^-  Huntington,  The  Church  Idea,  p.  211. 
J?'  J^fu  1?^'  Hammond.  John  Wesley,  "  Being  Dead  Yet  Speaketh,"  p.  114. 
J4   27th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  370.  ^ 

Jo'  ^"V"!?®'  ®^-  C!oxe,  Apollos,  or  the  Way  of  God,  p.  45. 
1.'  29th  line,  Drummond's  Programme  of  Christianity,  pp.  19-20. 

21,  21st  line,  Pearson  on  the  Creed,  p.  522.  . 

22,  7th  line,  Bp.  Coxe.  Apollos,  or  the  Way  of  God,  pp.  40-47. 
Sf'  ?!L"/}^'  Drummond's  Programme  of  Christianity,  p.  02. 
?t'  H^?  il"®'  Drummond,  The  City  Without  a  Church,  p.  45. 
HI'  28th  line,  Drummond,  The  City  Without  a  Church,  p.  45. 
^,  9th  line,  Bp.  Thompson,  First  Principles,  p.  17. 

??'  ?«?J^,?^'  Bp.  Coxe,  Apollos,  or  the  Way  of  God,  p.  95. 
81,  10th  line.  Miller's  Parish  Note-Book,  p.  14. 

83,  8rd  line,  Gladstone,  The  Vatican  Decrees,  p.  83. 

??♦  ?fr?  Ii"^'  1'/^?°''^'  Epist.  VII.  27,  V.  20;  v.  43;  VII.  v.  33. 

84,  85th  line,  Macleane,The  Coat  Without  Seam  Torn,  p.  93. 


C.  A.— 81 


(481) 


I 


PAGES 


THE   rni'RCH    FOR    AMKRICAJiS. 


»AGES  ^  -, 

35   14th  line,  Macleane,  The  Coat  Without  Seam  Torn,  p.  61. 

A2   '2Ut  line,  J.  H.  Hopkins,  Monsignor  Capel.  p.  33. 

la  Sth  line,  Littledale,  Words  for  Truth,  p.  20. 

A«i   nnth  line  Church  Eclectic,  vol.  h».  p.  IfH. 

ii  itst  line  Gayer,  A.  E.,  Papal  Infallibility  and  Supremacy,  p.  3. 

tf'  ?i?h  iTne  "Jknus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  pp.  (WMW. 

S'  mth  Wnl:  Sa?nion's  Infallibility  of  the  Church,  p.  325. 

57'  24th  line,  The  Vatican  Council,  p.  8H. 

fts'  19th  line  Gladstone-Schaff's  Vatican  Decrees,  pp.  '^-7-'^. 

M   Sth  line  History  of  the  Vatican  Council,  DrScWfT,  p.  79. 

m  Sh  1  ne!br  sSff,  Dogmatic  Decrees  of  the  Vatican  Council,  p.  Ib7. 

S'  i^rh  iViiP  Dr  Schaff,  History  of  the  Vatican  Council,  p.  M. 

6  '  mh     ne!  dJ:  Scliaff :  HistorJ  of  the  Vatican  Council,  p.  89. 

fii    Sth     ne  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  40. 

el'  ind  lin^.  Pretended  Speecli  of  a  Bishon  in  the  Council,  p.  195. 

ttfi'  Sth  line,  Keenan's  Controversial  Catechism. 

tl]  mhHn;,  "Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council^>.  129. 

fi7   94th  line  Quarterly  Review,  October.  1S89.  p.  .^M 

t?:  ll9?Une,  The  Church  Standard,  February  9.  im  p  442. 

74   11th  line, "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  S2. 

?t'  ^rd  line  Robins,  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  (Church,  p.  474. 

?!'  Sth  Hne,  New  York  Churchman,  September  2«,  1«^^P- •««• 

7?'  ^h  1  ne!  Salmon's  Infallibility  of  the  Church  VV-}^19,. 

80  29th  line,  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  00 

SV'  mtH     n^  nr  Schaff.  History  of  the  Vatican  Council 


«a'  9nd  line  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  1J«. 

S'  .1?h  li^ne  PuUer  The  Primitive  Saints  and  the  ^ee  of  Rome,  p.  XII 

Si'  1  th  Une,  G  adstone-Schaff,  the  Vatican  Decrees  p.  K^ 

S'  27th  ine  The  Vatican  Council  -  Speech  of  Abp.  Kenrick,  p.  12i,. 

M   5th  line  Robins,  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  «>. 

M  9th  iSe  Robins  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church  p^8K 

M   11th  line,  Robins,  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  88. 

84'  13th   ine  Robins  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  88. 

84'  16th     ne  Robins  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  89 

84'  19th     ne  Quirinus,  Letters  from  Rome  on  the  Council,  p.  832. 

M  26th  Wnl:  The  Sequel  to  the  Council,  The  Vatican  <Jouncll,  p.  229 

m   33rd     ne  InnoceJit  III.,  Serm.  2.  De  Consecr.  Pontif.,  p.  189,  ed.  < 

iJ' 4th  line! Littledale,  Words  for  Truth,  p.  58 

««'  sird  line  Supremacy  of  the  Pope  Disproved,  p.  47. 

S'  nth  line  Speech  of  Abp.  Kenrick,  The  Vatican  Council,  p.  107-109. 

S'  27th  line  Gore,  Roman  Catholic  Claims,  pp.  X\  II-X\  III. 
S'  Set  line  Salmon   Infallibility  of  the  Church,  p.  353. 
2?'  ^Jh  line  RSbms  On         Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  256. 
S  :  8  S    SI:  Robins':  oS  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church  p.  2o(.. 

S}'  ^  liSI:  ^^S^^^r^^Ti^^^^  Nf>te.  vol.  I.,  p.  246. 

W,  SthStne,""  P'rSiended  Speech  of  a  Bishop  in  the 
Council,  p.  181. 


Colon,  l.')75. 


Council— The  Vatican 


»4.  Slst  IhTe!  Pr^etended  Speech  of  a  Bishop  in  the 
Council,?.  177.  --     - 


Council— The 
Council— The 
Council, 


Vatican 


Vatican 


95  10th  TS'eTh^' Sequel  to  the  Council -The  Vatican  Council,  p 
S'  16th  Vml:  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Counci  ,  p.  63 
r^'  i^.f  !?"„'  ,4  T*„„.  "  Th^  Pone  and  the  Council,  p.  W 


23<'.. 


{)3. 


^-  S  line:  ■•  Zu^r  The  Po^  and  the  Council,  p. 

S-  l^fh'^fne'^R^MnXthl'ciaSs&'.he  Roman  Church,  p  m. 

S:  fflrd  line:  Robins:  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  1*. 

^-  S'rd  line'  fuTe?  Thl'primltt«  S^X  ^d  the  See  of  Rome.  p.  51. 
»  mt    Se  RoWns.  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church  p.  l.M. 

S.  i  iiSei  l£il?rihJT^Se 's^rinS  ^X^l^^..  p.  n. 


REFERENCES   TO   QUOTATIONS. 


483 


PAGES 

104,  3rd  line.  See  Smith's  Anglican  Orders;  Whence  Obtained,  p.  10. 
104,  26th  line,  Denny,  Anglican  Orders  and  Jurisdiction,  p.  143. 
110,  4th  line,  *'  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  217. 
IIU,  25th  line,  Robins,  On  the  Claims  of  the  Roman  Church,  p.  244. 
110,  29th  line,  Willis'  Pope  Honorius,  p.  26. 

110,  85th  line,  Willis'  Pope  Honorius,  p.  26. 

111,  16th  line,  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  324. 

111,  25th  line,  Salmon's  Infallibility  of  the  Church,  p.  456. 

112,  23rd  line,  Littledale,  Plain  Reasons  Against  Joining  the  Church  of  Rome, 

p.  90. 

113,  22nd  line,  Salmon's  Infallibility  of  the  Church,  p.  284. 

114,  2nd  line,  Littledale,  Plain  Reasons  Against  Joining  the  Church  of  Rome, 


114, 


pp.  208-209. 
29th  line,  Littledale,  Plain  Reasons  Against  Joining  the  Church  of  Rome, 

p.  209. 

115,  5th  line,  Ross-Lewin,  Continuity  of  the  English  Church,  p.  49. 
115,  14th  line,  Ross-Lewin,  Continuity  of  the  English  Church,  p.  49. 
115,  19th  line,  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Covincil,  p.  147. 

115,  33rd  line, "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  289. 

116,  10th  line,  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  289. 

116,  2t)th  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  176. 

117,  2nd  line,  Roliertson,  The  Growth  of  the  Papal  Power,  p.  181. 

118,  10th  line,  Salmon,  Infallibility  of  the  Church,  p.  102. 

118,  19th  line.  Pretended  Speech  of  a  Bishop  in  the  Council— The  Vatican 
Council,  p.  193. 

120,  8th  line,  Marshall's  Cyprian,  part  II.,  p.  203. 

121,  32nd  line,  Wilson,  W.  D.,  The  Church  Identified,  p.  123. 

122,  19th  line.  Smith,  J.  B.,  English  Orders;  Whence  Obtained,  p.  12. 

123,  18th  line,  Courayer  on  English  Ordinations,  p.  292. 
12;J,  35th  line,  J.  H.  Hopkins,  Monsignor  Capel,  p.  39. 

124,  11th  line,  J.  H.  Hopkins,  Monsignor  Capel,  p.  ;jy. 

125,  8th  line,  Dixon,  History  of  the  Church  of  England,  vol.  I.,  p.  58. 

125.  28th  line,Denny's  Anglican  Orders  and  Jurisdiction,  p.  1.^)5. 

126.  16th  line,  Seabury's  Haddan's  Apostolical  Succession,  p.  105. 
r2«»,  31st  line,  Hussey,  On  the  Rise  or  the  Papal  Power,  p.  63. 

127.  4th  line,  Hussey,  On  the  Rise  of  the  Papal  Power,  p.  64. 

127.  24th  line,  M.  R.  Butler,  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders,  p.  39  and  40. 

127,  30th  line,  Lee,  Validity  of  the  Holy  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England, 

p.  186. 

128,  23rd  line,  Gore,  Roman  CathoLic  Claims,  p.  147. 

129,  Pith  line,  Courayer  on  English  Ordinations,  p.  285. 
129,  26th  line.  In  Courayer  on  English  Ordinations,  p.  318. 

129,  .3:}rd  line,  In  Courayer  on  English  Ordinations,  pp.  319-320. 
131,  30th  line.  The  Living  Church,  May  19, 1894. 
i;^,  Kith  line.  Decree  of  Leo  XIII. 

i:S5,  13th  line,  Lee,  The  Validity  of  the  Holy  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England, 
pp.  488-500. 

137,  10th  line,  Lee,  Validity  of  the  Holy  Orders  of  the  Church  of  England,  ch. 

XXVI.,  p.  297. 

138,  15th  line,  London  Church  Times,  Septeml)er  25, 1896,  p.  297. 

139,  5th  line.  Church  Eclectic.  January.  1895,  p.  931. 

140,  25th  line,  London  Church  Times,  September  25, 1896,  p.  2{>2. 

141,  28th  line,  London  Church  Times,  September  25, 189t),  p.  292. 

143,  30th  line.  Report  of  the  Proceedings  of  the  Reunion  Conference  at  Bonn  in 
1874,  pp.  50,  51. 

1.50,  3rd  line.  The  Christian  Union,  1894. 

L51,  15th  line,  Bp.  Leonard,  Witness  of  the  American  Church  to  Pure  Chris- 
tianity, p.  15. 

151,  28th  line,  Bp.  H.  M.  Thompson's  The  Kingdom  of  God,  p.  3. 

156,  11th  line.  The  Christian  Union,  1894. 

KK),  7th  line,  Jewish  and  Christian  Messiah,  p.  218. 

160,  12th  line,  Firminger's  Attitude  of  the  Church  of  England  to  non-Episcopal 
Ordinations,  p.  3JJ. 

160,  33rd  line,  Simcox.  pp.  62,  63. 

162,  21st  line.  The  Christian  Union,  1894. 

166,  16th  line,  Hammond,  What  Does  the  Bible  Say  Aiiout  the  Church,  p.  23. 

166,  34th  line,  Hammond,  What  Does  the  Bible  Say  About  the  Church,  p.  12. 

167,  5th  line,  Hammond,  English  Nonconformity  and  Christ's  Christianity 

p.  150. 


f 


484 


TlIK   rillTRril    FOR    AMERICANS. 


PAtJES 

107, 
171, 
174, 
174, 
174, 
174, 
174, 


176, 

177, 

178, 

178, 

178, 

178, 

178, 

179, 

179, 

179, 

179, 

179, 

179, 

179. 

179, 

180, 

181, 

182, 

183, 

184, 

185, 

185, 

186, 

186, 

186, 

186, 

186, 

186, 

186, 

191, 

191, 

191, 

191, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

192, 

193, 

193, 

193, 

193, 

193. 

194. 

IW, 

19t5, 

1%, 

198, 

198, 

198, 

199, 

201, 

203, 

203. 

203, 

204. 


6th  line,  William  Law.  Letter  III.,  pp.  8, ». 

31stline,  Cunningham's  St.  Austin,  p.  lib. 

1st  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Cat^iohc  Epjseopate,  p.  42. 

3rd  line,  Bp.  Bull,  Sermon  XIH.  W orks,  vol.  I.,  p.  828. 

nth  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  (^. 

'Wild  line  Seabury's  Uaddan's  Apostolical  Succession,  p.  o5. 

mhliiutFro^^^^^^^^^  the  Consecration  of  Bp.  Sessums, 

bv  the  Bishop  of  Mississippi. 
2lst  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  pp.  12.^124. 

14th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p  12». 

1st  line.  Gore.  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  120. 

10th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catho  ic  Episcopate,  p. 

hith  line  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catho  ic  Kpiscopate,  p. 

19th  line  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p. 

34th  line  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate  p  112. 

Srdline  The  Perpetual  Government  of  Christ  s  Church,  ch.  XIII. 


109. 

109. 
519. 


p.  247. 


nth  line,  Sanderson,  On  Episcopacy,  part  II\;. /ec.  2 

iHth  line    lust  Vindication  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  io. 

mh  l!SI;  Taylor,  Works,  vol.  VII    Dedication  p.  XVIU.  ed.  Heber. 

24th  line,  Laud,  On  Church  Ritua.  p.  lU,.  (1S40) 

26th  line,  Staley,  The  Catholic  Religion^ p.  2S 

2«th  line,  Contemp.  Review,  October,  18i«.  p.  <22. 

t^rd  linp  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  dO(». 

mt    SI:  EagI?,  The  Christian  Ministry  in  the  New  Testament,  p.  30. 

26th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  110. 

mith  line  Sadler.  Church  Government,  p.  10.  . 

^hlinetfip.  Leonard,  Witness  of  the  American  Church  to  Pure  Christian- 

ity,p.67-«8.  _     .  ^ 

30th  line,  Labagh's  Theoklesia,  p.  20. 
31st  line,  Staley,  The  Catholic  Religion,  p.  33 
83rd  line,  Staley,  The  Catholic  Religion,  p. JW. 
2nd  line,  Staley.  The  Catholic  Religion,  p.  33. 
4th  line,  Staley,  The  Catholic  Religion,  p  34. 
6th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  P-  290 
19th  line,  West,  The  Kingdom  of  Heaven  upon  Earth,  p.  68 
23rd  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  245. 
32nd  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  240. 
35th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  521. 
22nd  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  24. 
24th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  24. 
27th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  24. 
31st  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  17. 
2nd  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  17. 
0th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  23i. 
10th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  23S. 
13th  line,  Marshall's  N«»tes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  241 
14th  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Cniurch  :  \N  hat  is  it,  p.  240. 
17th  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Church  :  W  hat  is  it.  p.  240. 
19th  line,  Hammond.  The  Christian  Church  :  W  hat  is  it.  p  24b. 
25th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  E]uscopate,  p.  241. 
35th  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Church  :  VN  hat  is  it.  P-  247. 
3rd  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Church :  VN  hat  is  it,  p.  24^. 
0th  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Church  :  W  hat  is  it.  p.  24^. 
0th  line,  Hammond,  The  Christian  Church  :  NN  hat  is  it,  p.  24<. 
Pith  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  28. 
23rd  line.  Gore.  The  Church  and  the  Ministr^v.  p.  49. 
14th  line.  The  Westminster  Ct»nfession,  ch.  XX \  . 
17th  line.  Hymn  220. 
IGth  line,  Article  XXV. 

20th  line.  Article  XXV.  .,„.,.  ^. 

8th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  294. 
2l8t  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  298. 
33rd  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  299. 
9th  line.  Gore,  The  Church  and  the  Ministry,  p.  150. 
20th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Churcli,  p.  20  , ..  ^  r. 

22nd  line,  Hammond.  "John  Wesley  •  Being  Dead,  J  et  Speaketh,      p.  54. 
25th  line,  Hammond.  "  .John  Wesley  *  Being  Dead,  ^  et  Speaketh,      p.  54. 
80th  line.  Rev.  W.  Arthur,  Contemn.  Review.  July,  1887. 
24th  liiie,f«rry,  English  Church  History,  II.  333. 


REFERENCES   TO    QUOTATIONS. 


485 


PAGES 


206,  26th  line,  Hammond,  English  Nonconformity,  and  Christ's  Christianity, 
p.  54.  "" 

206,  20th  line.  Cole,  R.  H.,  The  Anglican  Church,  p.  64. 

207,  22nd  line.  Miller's  Parish  Note  Book,  p.  19. 


XXV. 


23. 


212,  15th  line,  Seabury's  Haddan's  Apostolical  Succession,  p. 
214,  13th  line,  Communion  Hymn,  Ancient  and  Modern,  553. 

221,  30th  line,  Endowments  and  Establishment,  p.  10. 

222,  15th  line,  Goulburn,  The  Holy  Cathv>lic  Church,  p.  30. 

223,  4th  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  211. 

223,  27th  line.  Bp.  Kip,  Double  Witness  of  the  Church,  p.  120. 

224,  17th  line,  Abp.  Bramhall's  Works,  I.  2. 

•224,  25th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  ia5. 

225,  31st  line.  The  State  in  Its  Relations  to  the  Church,  vol.  II.  127, 1841. 

220,  24th  line.  Preface  concerning  the  Service  of  the  Church,  Prayer  Book,  1549 
220,  27th  line,  Howard,  R.,The  Church  of  England  and  Other  Religious  Com- 
munions, pp.  200-201. 
220,  33rd  line,  Oldroyd,  The  Continuity  of  the  English  Church  through  Eight- 
een Centuries,  p.  30.  or. 
227,  12th  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  177 
22«,  0th  line,  Nye,  The  Right  of  the  Church  of  England  to  Her  Property,  p  14 
230,  5th  line.  Dr.  Ingram,  England  and  Rome,  pp.  139-140. 

230,  29th  line.  Church  Standard,  August  17, 1895,  p.  458. 

231,  2nd  line.  Church  Standard,  August  17, 1895,  p.  458. 

232,  25th  line.  Dr.  Ingram,  England  and  Rome,  pp.  121-122. 
234,  5th  line.  Dr.  Ingram,  England  and  Rome,  p.  194. 

234,  9th  line,  Burnet,  Collection  of  Records,  0, 181. 

234,  22nd  line.  Dr.  Ingram.  England  and  Rome,  p.  195. 

236,  20th  line.  Gamier,  Title-deeds  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  31 


26. 


239,  28th  line,  W.  E.  Gladstone.  Speech  in  House  of  Commons,  May  24, 1870 

240,  23rd  line.  See  Bede  and  William  of  Malmesbury. 
240,  31st  line,  Bp.  Lightfoot,  Leaders  in  the  Northern  Church,  p.  9. 

irst  Period,  p.  30. 

iglican  (Jhurch.pp.  94-95. 

244,  12th  line,  Nye,  The  Story  of  the  Church  of  England,  p.  35. 

244,  27th  line.  Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History,  vol.  I.,  p. 

145-140. 

245,  5th  line.  Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History,  vol.  I.,  p.  147. 
245,  19th  line.  Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History,  vol.  I., p.  148. 
245,  27th  line,  See  Perry's  Student's  English  Church  History,  First  Period, 

p.  206. 
245,  30th  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  204. 
240.  21st  line.  Dr.  Ingram,  England  and  Rome.  p.  01. 
247,  15th  line.  Cole,  R.  H.,  The  Anglican  Church,  p.  97. 

247.  30th  line.  See  Brown's  Fasciculus.  II.  250. 

248,  3rd  line,  Bp,  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  219, 

248,  2:{rd  line,  Oldroyd.  A,  E.  Continuity  of  the  English  Church,  p.  23. 

248,  2iJth  line.  Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History,  vol.  I.,  p.  229. 

248.  35th  line.  Words  for  Truth,  Littledale.  pp.  ;«>-40,    -  '  h        • 

249,  24th  line,  Manning,  "  On  the  Unity  of  the  Church," 

249,  32nd  line.  Leaders  in  the  Northern  Church,  Bp,  Lightfoot,  p,  52. 

253,  0th  line.  Dr.  Ingram,  England  and  Rome,  p.  140. 

25.3,  29th  line,  Bp,  I^onard.  History  of  the  Christian  Church,  p,  238. 

254,  nth  line,  Bp,  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  151, 

255,  6th  line,  Barrett,  Nineteen  Questions  About   the  Protestant  Episcopal 

Church,  p.  3.  ^ 

250,  20th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  120. 
250,  25th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  120. 

256,  35th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p,  120. 


486 


THE   CHURCH    FOR    AMERICANS. 


PAGES 

257,  18th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Ohrist'i  Cltirch,  p.  136. 
257,  25th  line,  See  Sanford's  Bampton  Lectures,  1«01,  p.  49. 

257,  80th  line,  Sanford.  Bamuton  Lectures,  IWU,  p.  4». 

258,  4th  line,  Anglo  Catholic  Library.  Oxford,  vol.  XI.,  p. 
Prcemium  to  "  Codex  Canonum  Ecclesise  Primitivae." 

24th  line,  Dr.  McConnell,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  p. 


262, 
2t>3, 
2tVi, 
2tk>. 
2ti7, 
2I>7, 


XXIII.,  sec.  VI. 


16. 


12th  line.  See  Bp.  Coleman's  Church  in  America,  p.  «. 
23rd  line,  Bp.  Coleman,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  V. 
35th  line,  Bp.  Willx'rforce,  History  of  the  American  Chui 


293, 
24f4, 

297, 
299, 


_  rch,  p.  109. 

4th  linerBp*^  Wilberforce,  History' of  the  American  Church,  p.  109. 

13th  line.  Dr.  Peters'  (General  History  of  Connecticut. 
26S,  6th  line,  McVickar,  Professional  Years  of  Bisht>p  Holwrt,  pp.  82-85J. 
2iW,  25th  line.  Canon  Perry,  History  of  the  Church  «>f  England. 
269,  7th  line.  Dr.  McConnell,  History  of  the  American  Episconal  Church,  p.  b7. 
271,  28th  line,  Bp.  Perry,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  vol.  I., 
p.  247. 

273,  17th  line.  Hooker,  Eccl.  Pol.  VII.,  sec.  4. 

274,  21st  line.  Chapman's  Sermons  on  the  Church,  p.  76. 

274,  32nd  line.  See  Bp,  Perry's  History  of  the  American  Church,  vol.  I.,  p.  251. 

275,  14th  line,  Bolles,  Connecticut  and  Bishop  Sea  bury,  p.  9. 

276,  17th  line,  Bp.  Meade,  Reasons  for  Loving  the  Episcopal  Church,  p.  11. 
278,  rith  line.  Hymnal.  .  „      ,     ,_ 

281,  86th  line,  Beardsley,  Life  and  Correspondence  of  Bp.  Seabury,  p.  237. 
284,  24th  line,  Stearns,  The  Faith  of  Our  Forefathers,  p.  41. 

284,  34th  line,  Dupin,  Compendious  History  of  the  Church,  Century  XI.,  ch. 

VII.  ,    ^ 

285.  7th  line,  Stearns,  The  Faith  of  Our  Forefathers,  p.  41. 
285,  34th  line,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  Bp.  Coxe,  p.  22. 
28<l,  1st  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  23. 
2««>,  13th  line.  Gore,  Roman  Catholic  Claims,  p.  97. 

288,  5th  line.  The  Cincinnati  Tribune,  OcIoVkt  21,  1895. 

291,  8th  line,  Bp.  Perry,  The  Relations  of  the  Church  and  the  Country,  p.  26. 

17th  line,  Bp.  Coleman,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  132. 

35th  line.  Description  on  an  engraving  entitled  "  The  First  Prayer  in  Con- 
gress." 

29th  line.  The  Cincinnati  Tribune,  October  21, 189B. 

7th  line,  The  Church  Standard,  September  14, 1895,  p.  587. 
299,  32nd  line.  See  Appendix  XVII. 
sot),  31st  line,  Dr.  McConnell,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  p.  340. 
»)8,  15th  line.  Church  Standard,  July  8, 1893,  p.  19. 
;{os,  31st  line.  Church  Standard,  July  8, 1898,  p.  19. 
310,  5th  line.  Hymnal. 

315.  :JOth  line,  British  Weekly.  January  17, 1890.  ,      .    .     ,     ...    .    .      , 

316,  3rd  line,  Hammond,  English  Nonconformity  and  Christ  s  Christianity, 

p.  227. 

817,  nth  line,  Thos.  K.  Beecher,  What  a  Congregationalist  Can  Say  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church,  p.  10. 

318,  7thline,  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  p.  29.  ,   ,      ^   „„, 

320,  15th  line,  Bingham's  Antiquities  of  the  Christian  Church,  vol.  I.,  ch.  VIII. 

321,  26th  line.  Barrett.  The  Churchman's  Scrap-Book,  p.  36. 

322,  1st  line.  Barrett,  The  Churchman's  Scrap-Book,  p.  36. 
322,  19th  line,  Barrett,  The  Churchman's  Scrap-Book,  p.  35. 
321,  26th  line.  The  Churchman,  December  24, 1887,  p.  738. 
3;«,  8th  line.  Tracts  for  Missionary  Use,  No.  3,  p.  8. 

m\,  2:ird  line,  Rubric  in  the  Prayer  Book.  v 

337,  20th  line,  Hammond,  English  Nonconformity  and  Christ  s  Christianity, 
p.  10. 

,  14th  line,  Bp.  Vale.  The  Comprehensive  Church,  p.  62. 

,  8th  line,  Cecil's  Remains,  quoted  l)y  Bp.  Kip  in  "  Double  Witness. 

345,  5th  line,  Labagh,  Theoklesia,  p.  173. 

346,  ]8th  line.  Bishops  Convention  Pastoral,  1805. 
351,  13th  line.  Article  XXV. 

355,  17th  line.  Anecdote  related  by  Bp.  J.  S.  Johnston,  of  Texas. 

3t>4,  3rd  line,  "  Janus,"  The  Pope  and  the  Council,  p.  18. 

3t'»4,  14th  line,  Stearns.  The  Faith  of  Our  Forefathers,  p.  256. 

!m,  21st  line.  Dr.  McConnell.  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  p.  60. 

865,  3rd  line,  Bp.  Colem-Mi,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  24. 

365,  32nd  line,  Stearns.  The  Faith  of  Our  Forefathers,  p.  257. 

366,  25th  line,  Bp.  Coleman,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  60. 


342, 
344, 


»♦ 


REFERENCES  TO  (QUOTATIONS. 


487 


PAGES 

366,  31st  line.  Dr.  McConnell,  History  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  pp. 

50-52. 
368,  20th  line,  M.  R.  Butler.  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders,  p.  44. 

373,  3rd  line,  Miller's  Parish  Note  Book,  p.  49. 

878,  81st  line,  Bp.  Leonard,  The  Witness  of  the  American  Church  to  Pure 
Christianity,  pp.  51-62.  ^         _ 

374,  nth  line,  Thos.  K.  Beecher,  What  a  Congregationalist  Can  Say  of  the  Prot- 

estant Episcopal  Church,  p.  13. 
374,  35th  line.  Millers  Parish  Note  Book,  p.  52. 
880,  6th  line,  Bp.  Robertson,  The  Churchman's  Answer  as  to  the  History  and 

Claims  of  the  American  Episcopal  Church,  pp.  25-26. 

384,  24th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  119. 

385,  19th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  119. 

386,  9th  line,  The  Churchman,  January  12, 1895,  p.  46. 

386,  24th  line.  Shields,  The  United  Church  of  the  United  States,  p.  47. 
388,  6th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  10. 
388,  8th  line,  Hammond,  What  is  Christ's  Church,  p.  10. 

388,  nth  line,  Speech  at  the  Wolverhampton  Church  Congress. 

389,  nth  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Institutes  of  Christian  History,  p.  283. 

391,  33rd  line,  The  Churchman,  April  7, 1894,  p.  404. 

392,  19th  line.  The  Churchman,  April  7, 1894,  p.  404. 

395,  25th  line.  History  of  the  English  People,  J.  R.  Green. 

397,  9th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  286. 
897,  24th  line,  Marshall's  Notes  on  the  Catholic  Episcopate,  p.  314. 

398,  26th  line,  Bp.  Coxe,  Apollos,  or  the  Way  of  God,  P.  244.  ,    ,^  ,  „ 

899,  16th  line,  Hammond, ''  John  Wesley  '  Being  Dead,  \et  Speaketh,'     p.  14. 
899,  21st  line,  John  Wesley's  Works,  Third  London  Edition. 

399,  27th  line,  Hammond,  "  John  Wesley, '  Being  Dead,  Yet  Speaketh,'     p.  48. 

400,  5th  line,  John  Wesley  Works,  XIII.,  58. 

401,  6th  line.  The  Churchman,  April  14, 1894,  p.  482. 

402,  14th  line.  Hymnal.  ,      *  ^     ,      j  *  i:-   •  i 

405,  5th  line,  Firminger's  Attitude  of  the  Church  of  England  to  non-Episcopal 

Ordinations,.pp.  65-66.  ,      ^«,  .  ^   x.     -oi     ,      •     ..  . 

406,  22nd  line,  Bp.  Griswold,  The  Apostolic  Office,  quoted  by  Clarke  in     A 

Walk  About  Zion,"  pp.  90-92. 
408,  15th  line,  Living  Church,  June  29, 1895. 

408,  29th  line,  Living  Church,  June  29, 1895.         

409,  15th  line,  Bolles,  Washington :  A  Centennial  Discourse  to  Young  Men,  p.  19. 
409,  27th  line,  Bolles,  Washington :  A  Centennial  Discourse  to  Young  Men,  p.  18. 

409,  34th  line,  Bolles,  Washington :  A  Centennial  Discourse  to  Young  Men,  p.  19. 

410,  9th  line,  Bolles,  Washington :  A  Centennial  Discourse  to  Young  Men,  p.  19. 
410,  14th  line,  Living  Church,  June  29, 1895. 

410,  22nd  line,  Bolles,  Washington :  A  Centennial  Discourse  to  Young  Men,  p.  20. 
410,  31st  line,  Bp.  Perry,  The  American  Church  and  the  American  Constitu- 
tion, p.  5.  ,     ,       .  ^       ... 
4th  line,  Bp.  Perry,  The  American  Church  and  the  American  Constitu- 
tion, p.  5.  „ 

~     Perry,  The  American  Church  and  the  American  Constitu- 


4n, 


4n, 


411, 


10th  line,  Bp. 

tion,  5.  p. 
16th  line,  Bp. 


,  Coleman,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  74. 
4ni  2lst  line,  Bp.  Coleman,  The  Church  in  America,  p.  74. 


4i2|  ist  line,  Bp".  Perry,  The  American  Church  and  the  American  Constitution, 

p  7. 

412,  14th  line.  Dr.  John  Stoughton's  History  of  Religion  in  England. 

418,  3rd  line,  Bp.  Perry,  The  American  Church  and  the  American  Constitution, 

413,  21st  line,  Bp.  Perry,  The  Faith  of  the  Framers  of  the  Constitution  of  the 

United  States,  pp.  2-10. 

414,  34th  line,  Bp.  Perry,  "  The  Faith  of  the  Framer.s,"  p.  2. 

417,  3rd  line,  Taine,  History  of  English  Literature,  pp.  251-252. 

418,  30th  line,  Shanklin,  Some  Objections  to  the  Episcopal  Church  Considered 

and  Answered,  p.  18. 

419,  nth  line.  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  p.  30. 
419,  15th  line.  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  pp.  29-30. 

419,  25th  line.  Shields,  The  United  Church  of  the  United  States,  p.  25. 

421,  28rd  line.  The  Good  Way;  or,  Why  Christians  of  Whatever  Name  May  Be- 
come Churchmen,  p.  16.  .J       J 

421,  27th  line,  Shanklin,  Some  Objections  to  the  Episcopal  Church  Considered 
and  Answered,  p.  17. 


I 


I 


422, 
422, 
423, 


488  rmm  church  fok  Americans. 

PAGES 

421,  31st  line,  Wesley's  Sermons,  No.  CXV.  ,,      ^ 

421,  34th  line.  The  Good  Way ;  or,  Why  Christians  of  Whatever  Name  May  Be- 

come Churchmen,  p.  18. 

422,  8th  line.  The  Good  Way;  or.  Why  Christians  of  Whatever  Name  May  Be- 
come Churchmen,  pp.  18-19. 

22nd  line.  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  pp.  30-31. 
27th  line.  From  the  Memoirs  of  Professor  Austin  Phelps. 
8th  line,  Thos.  K.  Beecher,  What  a  Cougregationalist  Can  Say  of  the  Prot- 
estant Episcopal  Church,  pj).  IMl. 
424,  25th  line.  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  pp.  177-178. 

427,  29th  line.  Mines,  Looking  for  the  Church,  pp.  32-33.      • 

428,  26th  line,  Anderson's  History  of  the  Colonial  Church,  vol.  III.,  p.  392. 

429,  8th  line.  Works  of  John  Wesley,  Third  London  Editon. 
432,  31st  line.  New  York  Churchman,  August  4, 1894,  p.  129. 
434,  17th  line,  Church  Eclectic,  December,  1894,  p.  816. 

434,  25th  line.  Church  Eclectic,  Decemljer,  1894,  p.  816. 

435,  18th  line,  Butler,  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders,  p.  53. 
4*5,  26th  line,  London  Church  Times,  July  31, 1896. 

435,  33rd  line,  Butler.  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders,  p.  58. 

436,  4th  line,  Butler,  Rome's  Tribute  to  Anglican  Orders,  p.  65. 

437,  16th  line,  Wesley's  Sermons,  vol.  III.,  p.  261. 

443,  23rd  line,  Palmer's  Church  History,  p.  168. 

444,  17th  line,  Ingram,  England  and  Rome.  p.  183. 

445,  18th  line,  McClure's  Magazine,  June,  1896,  pp.  3-4, 

446,  29th  line.  Living  Church,  Septemlier  19, 1896,  p.  586. 

447,  4th  line.  Living  Church,  Septeml)er  19, 1896,  p.  58C». 
447,  8th  line.  Living  Church,  Septeml)er  19, 189<;,  p.  586. 

447,  21st  line,  Living  Church,  September  19, 189t>,  p.  586. 

448,  29th  line.  The  Pacific  Churchman,  June  15, 1896. 

452,  22nd  line,  Cheney,  What  is  the  Reformed  Episcopal  Church?  p.  2. 

453,  7th  line,  Cheney,  What  is  the  Reformed  Episcopal  Church  ?  p.  14. 
453,  10th  line.  Cheney,  What  is  the  Reformed  Episcopai  Church  ?  p.  14. 
456,  4th  line.  Prayer  Book, "  The  Form  and  Manner  of  Ordering  Priests." 
456,  6th  line.  Prayer  Book,  "  Evenine  Prayer." 

456,  8th  line,  Prayer  Book,  Baptismal  Office. 
456,  nth  line,  Prayer  Book,  Baptismal  Office. 

456,  12th  line.  Prayer  Book,  Communion  Office. 

457,  3rd  line,  St.  John,  20:  23. 
457,  7th  line,  St.  John,  3:  5. 

457,  26th  line,  St.  Matthew,  26:  26-28. 

457,  32nd  line,  St.  John,  6:  52-58. 

458,  9th  line,  I.  Corinthians,  10:  16.  ^     „  ^  «^       ^  „,  .  i    tt 
458,  18th  line.  Lane,  Illustrated  Notes  on  English  Church  History,  vol.  II.,  p. 

75. 

464,  28th  line,  Ohio  State  Journal,  Monday  Morning,  February  10,'1896. 

465.  27th  line.  Quoted  in  Kip's  Double  Witness,  pp.  215-216. 

467, 13th  line,  Confraternitv  of  the  Blessed  Sacrament,  "  Altar  Wines,"  p.  1. 
469,  17th  line.  Perry,  Bp.,  The  Faith  of  the  Signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Inde- 
pendence. 

474,  14th  line.  The  Oklahoma  Churchman,  June,  1896. 

475,  27th  line,  Psalm  XLV.,  8,  Prayer  Book  Version. 

475,  32nd  line,  Schaff  Herzog  Encyclopaedia,  vol.  I.,  p.  729. 

476,  9th  line,  Church  Life.  August,  1896,  p.  9. 

476,  27th  line,  Barrett,  Nineteen  Questions  About  the  Protestant  Episcopal 

Church,  p.  4. 

477,  6th  line,  Quoted  in  Kip's  Double  Witness,  p.  237. 

480,  I8th  line,  F17,  Lectures  on  the  Church  of  England,  p.  17. 


INDEX. 


ABB^  DUCHESNE,  134 ;  testimony  of, 
against  so-called  defectiveness  of 
Edwardian  Ordinal,  140 ;  on  Doctrine  of 
Intention,  141. 

Abbe  Portal,  M.  Dalbus,  on  the  Validity  of 
Anglican  Orders,  V6:i. 

Abbott,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  re- 
marks of,  on  Calvin's  application  for 
Consecration  to  the  Episcopate,  397. 

Abraham,  the  Jew,  Conversion  of,  to  Chris- 
tianity, 117. 

Absolution,  priestly,  as  taught  by  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  352. 

Accessions  to  Episcopal  Church  from  De- 
nominationalists,  142,  305 ;  from  Rom- 
anists, 307. 

Adams,  letter  of,  to  his  wife,  concerning 
tirst  prayer  in  Congress,  294 :  admission 
as  to  the  important  partof  Episcopalians 
iu  the  lievolutionarj'  War,  379. 

Adrian  VI.,  confession  of,  regarding  the 
liabilitv  of  Popes  to  err,  82. 

Advent,  from,  to  Trinity,  teaching  of, 
Bishop  of  Ohio  on,  373. 

Agreement  between  Anglican  and  Greek 
Churches,  39,  145;  between  Anglican, 
Greek  and  Roman  Churches,  47, 345;  be- 
tween Anglican  and  Roman  Churches, 
119 ;  aflFected  Ly  Leo  XIII.'s  decree  of 
Anglican  invalidity,  144  ;  between  the 
Anglican  Church  and  Denominational- 
ists,  390. 

Aidan,  St.,  not  Augustine,  the  Apostle  to 
the  Saxons,  240. 

Alfred,  King,  lease  given  by  the  Church  of 
England  in  his  reign,  228. 

America,  discovered  by  Episcopalians,  261. 
361;  the  Episcopal  Church  canonic- 
ally  the  Church  of  the  country,  280. 

American  Episcopal  Church,  the,  259-310; 
the,  pre-Colonial  period,  261-262;  Colo- 
nial period,  263-275;  National  period, 
276-310 ;  most  Scriptural  and  Apostolic 
Church,  356 ;  the  Apostolic,  359-361 ;  the 
racial  Church,  301-368;  valid  ministry 
of,  369-371 ;  offers  superior  opportun- 
ities, 371-381 ;  its  doctrinal  stability, 
381-386;  the  only  hope  of  Christian 
unity,  386402. 

Amusements  left  to  the  conscience  of  Epis- 
copalians, 325 ;  all,  permitted  that  do 
not  break  the  Baptismal  vows,  462-464. 

Anabaptists,  the,  and  Martin  Luther,  211. 


Anecdote  concerning  a  little  girl  and  her 
non  church  member  grandfather,  20 ; 
a  woman  who  was  not  a  sinner,  25 ;  the 
miner  and  the  General  Confession,  26 ; 
the  woman  who  married  a  Denomina- 
tionalist,  31 ;  Sixtus  V.  and  the  Bible, 
72 ;  the  Grotto  of  Lourdes,  75 ;  the  House 
of  Loretta,  76-77;  the  conversion  of 
Abraham,  the  Jew,  117 ;  Dr.  Wolff  and 
the  Greek  Bishop,  illustrating  theun- 
scripturalnessof  a  self-constituted  min- 
istry, 209;  illustrating  the  importance 
of  more  instruction  concerning  the 
Episcopal  Church,  217 ;  illustrating  tne 
misfortune  growing  out  of  the  want  of 
Episcopal  oversight,  266;  concerning 
Chief  Justice  Marshall,  276 ;  Bishop  Sea- 
bury  and  me  Presbyterians,  281 ;  con- 
cerning Bishop  Chase,  287 ;  of  Bishop 
Bedell  concerning  the  young  deacon 
and  the  Denominationalists,  334-336; 
of  Presbyterian  lady  and  ex-Methodist 
minister  on  confession,  352-353 ;  change 
in  Calvinistic  theology,  384 ;  the  old- 
time  Church  socials,  4H2. 

Angelo,  Michael,  in  his  "  Last  Judgment," 
includes  Popes  and  Cardinals  among 
the  damned,  116. 

Anglican  Bishops,  connection  of,  with  the 
Apostles,  370. 

Anglican  Church,  the  Communions  in- 
cluded in  the,  39;  the  Pope's  offer  to  re- 
ceive it  to  Roman  Communion,  130, 139 ; 
why  its  controversies  are  not  wholly 
settled  by  appeal  to  Scriptural  and 
Patristic  writings,  152;  occupies  the 
via  media  between  Denominations  and 
Rome,  196,  344,  386 ;  the  Church  of  our 
race,  :3()8. 

Anglican  Communion,  the,  <loctrinal  stabil- 
ity of,  65-66,  386  ;  the  future  of,  3%. 

Anglican  Orders,  119-146;  independent 
Apostolic  strands  in,  122 ;  Leo  XIII.'s  re- 
cent decree  of  Invalidity  reviewed,  132- 
146;  admitted  validity  of,  by  M.  Dal- 
bus, 133 ;  Abbe  Duchesne,  134 ;  by 
several  Roman  dignitaries,  136;  the 
Sorbonne  Faculty  on,  136-137;  valid- 
ity admitted  by  members  of  the  Vati- 
can Council,  137 ;  Papal  decisions  on, 
137-139;  Dr.  DolUnger  on,  143;  Greek 
Catholic  scholars,  testimony  of,  on,  434- 
436. 

(489) 


I 


I 


490 


INDEX. 


Anglican  Ordination,  w«ming  in  no  essen- 
tial, 370. 

Anglicans,  advantage  of,  over  Denomina- 
tionalists,  in  dealing  with  the  Roman 
pretensions,  53;  wherein  they  diflFer 
from  Romans.  54,  313-355;  disposed  to 
admit  the  primacy  of  St.  Peter,  90;  ap- 
peal of,  Romanists  to  the  Pope  and  De- 
nomi nationalists  to  their  founders,  155. 

Anglo-Saxons,  not  converted  by  Roman 
Missionaries,  2:i8. 

Anne,  Queen,  in  the  reign  of,  arrangements 
made  to  send  Bishops  to  the  American 
Colonies.  268. 

Anti-Infallibilists  at  the  Vatican,  59. 

Antioch,  Church  of,  set  apart  St.  Paul  and 
St.  Barnabas  to  be  Apostles.  173. 

Apocrapha,  the,  regarded  as  Scripture  by 
Romanists,  63.  ,  ,  ^ 

Apostasy  to  Rome,  the,  306-307 ;  will  be 
farther  decreased  by  Leo  XHl.'s  decree 
of  Anglican  invalidity,  13:^. 

Apostles,  equality  of,  established  by  Scrip- 
tures, 92.  .     , 

Apostles  and  Saints,  worship  of,  liturgical, 
314. 

Apoetleship,  St.  Paul's,  not  a  justification 
of  Denominationalism,  ;5o8. 

Apostolate,  its  perpetuity  promised,  17:". ;  if 
perpetuated,  as  essential  to  the  Church 
now  as  ever.  175 ;  perpetuated  m  the 
Episcopate,  176. 

Apostolic  Canons,  an  evidence  cf  National 

Apostolic  Church,  the  depository  of  Sacra- 
mental grace,  191 ;  necessity  of  com- 
munion with.  197. 

Apostolic  Commission,  the  evidence  of 
National  Churches,  40. 

Apostolic  origin  of  the  threefold  ministry, 
Lightfoot  on  the,  405-40<>. 

Apostolic  Sacraments,  teaching  of  the 
Fathers  concerning  the  necessity  of, 
198. 

Apostolic  See  of  Rome,  the  only  one  in  the 
West   104. 

Apostolic  Succession,  through  Parker  and 
Laud,  130;  testimony  concerning,  by 
Abbe  Portal,  134;  illustrated  by  the 
Oak  tree,  175 ;  from  the  Episcopates  of 
Jerusalem,  Rome  and  Ephesus,  to  the 
Anglican  Communion,  370. 

Aquinas,  Thomas,  corapleteii  the  founda- 
tions of  fraud  upon  which  the  Roman 
system  is  built,  109-110. 

Archbishop  Bramhall,  on  the  line  of  Apos- 
tolic Succession,  179. 

Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  the,  remarks  on 
uninstructed  Church  members,  5 ;  on 
English  Romanism,  368. 

Archbishop  Laud.  Apostolic  Succession, 
independent  of  Rome,  through,  180 ;  of- 
fer€Ni  the  Cardinal's  hat,  139. 

Archbishop  Parker,  Apostolic  Succession 
througn,  130. 

Argument  for  the  Scripturalness  of  Na- 
tional Churches,  40. 

Arian  heresy,  the,  71,  3.'i9. 

Ark  of  Salvation,  the  Church,  18JJ-194. 


Asbury,  Wesley's  repudiation  of  his  Epis- 
copal  pretensions,  400. 

Augustine,  conference  with  British  Bish- 
ops, 243 ;  first  Bishop  of  Canterbury,  370. 

Augustine,  St.,  and  Pope  Gregory  I.,  41, 43 ; 
on  "  I  will  give  you  the  Keys,"  89 ;  on 
the  visibility  of  the  Kingdom  of  God, 
171. 

Authorities  consulted,  lists  of,  16,  52,  148, 
216,  260.  312,  358. 

Avignon  Schism,  the.  61. 


BACON,  Roger,  imprisoned  by  Rome,  78. 
Baltimore,  Lord,  and  Maryland  tol- 

Bancroft  on  religious  liberty  to  Americans 

the  gift  of  Romanists,  364-368. 
Baptism,  the  door  to  the  Church,  19  .  the 
mode  appointed  by  Christ  for  confes- 
sion of  Him,  21,  460;  Roman  ceremo- 
nies  in  connection  with,   80;   valid 
even  when  irregular,  191, 207 ;  an  Epis- 
copal Clergyman  the  first  to  adminis- 
ter it  in  America,  262;  of  Pocahontas. 
263;  properly  called  "the  new  birth," 
457 ;   completed  by  Confirmation,  460. 
Baptist  Denomination,  date  of  the,  34 ;  a 
human  organization,  170 ;  subdivisions 
of  the,  340 ;  no  longer  Calvinistic,  384  ; 
will  probably  pass  away,  473. 
Baptist  reason  for  Episcopal  accessions,  306. 
Baptists,  the,  interchange  of  pulpits,  3;{1- 
334 ;  exclusiveness  of,  341 ;  doctrine  of, 
held  by  the  Church,  389;  one  signer 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence 
among,  469-470. 
Barlow's  Consecration  admitted  by  Roman 

writers,  128, 134. 
Barnes,  Albert,  encomium  of,  on  the  Book 

of  Common  Prayer,  419. 
Baronius,    Cardinal,    on    immorality    of 

Popes,  114, 117. 
Bede,  the  Venerable,  citation  from,  43. 
Beecher,  Henry  Ward,  encomium  of,  on  the 

Book  of  Common  Prayer,  424. 
Beecher,  Thomas  K.,  encomium  of,  on  the 

Book  of  Common  Prayer,  423. 
Bellamiine,   Cardinal,  authority  for  the 
charge  of  Papal  deceit,  74 ;  Papal  igno- 
rance, 80 ;  on  Papal  jurisdiction,  84. 
Bible,  sectarian  and  uon  church  member- 
ship not  accounted  for  by  its  seeming 
contradictions,  2 ;  date  of  its  construc- 
tion, 151;  divisions  of  Old  and  New 
Covenants,  189;    lAtin   translation  of 
Sixtus  v.,  72 ;  by  Rome  interdicted  to 
the  common  people,  74, 112. 
Bishop  and  Pope  used  interchangeably,  103. 
Bishop  and  Presbyter  originally  convert- 
ible terms,  180,  273-274, 405. 
Bishop  Lightfoot,  on  the  conversion  of  the 
Anglo-Saxons,   240;   on  opposition  of 
the  British  Church  to  Roman  usurpa- 
tion, 249 ;  on  the  Apostolic  origin  of  the 
threefold  ministry,  405. 
Bishop  Pearson  and  Bishop  Coxe  on  non 
church  membership,  21-22. 


INDEX. 


491 


Bishop  Seabury,  arrival  of,  in  America,  six 
years  before  a  Roman  Bishop,  280. 

Bishop  of  Rome,  the  first,  89 ;  the  first  to 
arrive  in  America,  280. 

Bishop  of  Vermont,  the,  on  Papal  Infalli- 
bility, 67. 

Bishops,  the,  of  canonical  descent,  perx)et- 
uators  of  the  Church,  37 ;  number  of, 
in  Britain,  41 ;  early  Roman,  interpre- 
tations of  the  texts  relied  upon  by 
Ultramontanists,  8(>-89 ;  the,  of  to-day 
prove  the  Bishops  of  eighteen  cen- 
turies ago,  175 ;  Fathers  on  the  necessi- 
ty of,  to  the  existence  of  a  Church,  176- 
185;  Roman,  in  England,  disclaim  any 
title  to  the  property  of  the  English 
Church,  '227;  supremacy  of  in  their 
own  jurisdictions,  265 ;  the  creation  of 
spurious  ones  for  the  United  States 
mooted,  277;  American,  all  have  the 
Scottish  as  well  as  the  English  succes- 
sion, "284;  American,  not  Autocrats, 
298 ;  Pastoral  Letter  of  the,  346 ;  Au- 
glican.connected  with  the  Apostles,  370. 

Bishops  of  Alexandria  not  Presbyters,  182. 

Bishops  of  Apostolic  Succession  necessary 
to  the  existence  of  a  Church,  37. 

Bishops  of  Iowa  and  Maryland,  the,  on 
Roman  accessions  to  the  Church,  307, 

Blasphemy,  the,  of  Papal  Infallibility,  61. 

"  Blue  Laws"  of  New  England,  the,  267. 

Boccaccio,  worthy  of  Roman  Canonization, 
117. 

Boniface  VIII.,  Pope,  and  his  Bull,  Uriam 
Sandam,  8:i. 

Book  of  Common  Prayer,  the,  a  proof  of 
the  Continuity  of  the  English  Church, 
225-226 ;  part  of,  in  the  conversion  of 
the  President  and  Faculty  of  Yale  Col- 
lege, 271  ;  encomiums  on,  by  non- 
Episcopalian.s,  416-428;  Pope  Pius  IV., 
on,  432,  433;  its  teachings  justified, 
against  Reformed  Episcopalians,  455- 
458. 

Boesuet's  Variations  among  Protestants.  66. 

Bramhall,  Abp.,  the  line  of  Apostolic  Suc- 
cession, 179. 

Breviary,  corruption  of,  in  the  interest  of 
the  dogma  of  infallibility.  111. 

British  Bishops,  conference  with  Augus- 
tine, 242. 

British  Church,  representation  of,  in  great 
Councils,  41 ;  not  a  mission  of  Rome, 
237 ;  difterence  between  it  and  the  Ro- 
man Church,  237-238. 

Bull,  Papal,  of  Leo  XIII.,  decreeing  Angli- 
can Orders  invalid,  132-146. 

Bunyan,  John,  the  wish  of,  concerning 
prejudice,  385. 

CABOT,  John,  discoverer  of  America, 
261,  361. 
Calvin,  applied  to  English  Bishops  for  Con- 
secration, 48,  397 ;  his  doctrines  aban- 
doned by  Baptists  and  Presbyterians, 
383. 
Calvinistic  theology,  384. 
Canon  or  laws  of  the  Apostles,  42. 


Card-playing  and  amusements  a  matter  of 
conscience,  not  of  legislation,  462-464, 

Carroll,  Bp.,  the  first  of  the  Roman  Church 
in  America,  arrived  six  years  after 
Bishop  Seabury,  280. 

Cathedrals  and  old  Churches  of  England, 
the,  an  evidence  that  British  Church 
was  not  a  mission  of  Rome,  238. 

Catholic,  how  to  determine  whether  or 
not  a  Cv'hurch  is,  360  ;  significance  of, 
as  applied  to  the  Episcopal  Church, 
477-480. 

CathoUc  Creeds,  68, 477-480. 

Causes  leading  to  Papal  InfalUbility,  61 ;  of 
the  incorrect  opinion  that  Henry  VIII. 
founded  the  ("hurch  of  England,  221 ; 
accounting  for  the  slow  growth  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  at  first  in  America, 
278-:302. 

Celebrated  Episcopalians,  some,  255,  256, 
289-297,  326,  377-381. 

Celibacy,  when  introduced  by  Rome,  67. 

Celtic,  Church  of,  not  annihilated  by  the 
Angles  and  Saxons,  238. 

Celtic  Evangelists  more  successful  than 
Roman  Missionaries,  240. 

Celtic  Priests  and  Missionaries,  influence 
of,  241. 

Ceremonies,  tendency  to  unduly  depreciate 
them,  196. 

Certitude,  desire  of,  accounts  for  the  doc- 
trine of  infallibility,  61-68. 

Challenge  of  Hooker  to  the  Presbyterians, 
the.  206 ;  of  Cranmcr  to  the  Roman 
Catholics,  225. 

Change,  the,  from  Episcopal  polyarchy  to 
Papal  monarchy,  105-106. 

Charity  expressed  for  those  who  differ  from 
us,  9-11,  201,  207,  211,  332. 

Charles  II.,  patent  made  out  in  the  reign 
of,  appointing  Rev.  Dr.  Alexander 
Murray  Bishop  of  Virginia,  268. 

Chase,  Bp.,  anecdote  connected  with  the 
laying  of  the  foundation  for  "  Old  Ken- 
yon,"  287. 

Chillingworth,  crushing  answer  of,  to  the 
representations  of  Presbyterians,  184. 

Choice  of  a  Church,  the,  29-50 ;  not  free  to 
follow  preference,  30. 

Christ,  formed  a  Church  to  be  entered,  2-19 ; 
loyal  Church  membership  necessary  to 
the  service  of,  18;  examples  and  pre- 
cepts of,  18;  came  to  save  sinners, 
hence  the  insufliciency  of  the  excuse, 
"not  good  enough,"  25;  profession 
of,  28;  the  Vine,  not  the  Pope,  41; 
Pop)e  not  the  Vicar  of,  67  ;  unwilling 
to  name  a  chief  among  His  followers, 
92,  94-95 ;.  founded  a  visible  Church,  155- 
172 ;  mission  of,  not  to  disseminate  a 

Shilosophy,  but  to  establish  a  King- 
om,  156 ;  established  a  Church,  159 ; 
authorizes   the  use  of  pre-composed 
prayers,  314. 
Christ's  Gospel  has  more  to  say  about  the 

Church  than  any  other  subject,  19. 
Christ's  Mystical  Body,  10. 
Christ's  great  word,   "The  Kingdom  of 
God."  18. 


t 


f 


i 


r 


492 


INDEX. 


Christendom,  divided,   12;    divided  into 

live  Patriarchates,  103. 
Christiani,  signification  of  the  name.  160. 
Christianity,  importance  of  its  ecclesias- 
tical aspect,  vi ;  the  foundation  of  civil- 
ization, 23.  . 
Christian  Unity,  a  prayer  for,  13;  the  Epis- 
copal Church  the  only  hojie  of,  38t>-401. 
Christians,  non  church  members  not  origi- 
nally regarded  as  such,  20;  Denomi- 
nations of.  in  America.  35.  . 
ChrysoRtom,  St.,  Service  Book  of,  used  in 
Constantinople,  315.                  ^    ^,  „ 
Church,  the,  fidelity  to,  illustrated,  vii,  9 ; 
its  existence  a  necessity  admitted  by 
Renan,  24.  25 ;  the  choice  of  a,  29-50, 
261 ;  to  which,  God  would  have  us  be- 
long, 31 ;  conceptions  of,  32-47 ;  Roman 
conception    of,    32;    Denominational 
conception  of,  33 ;  Greek  and  Anglican 
conception  of,  38;  and  the  State,  126 ; 
Anglican  conception  of,  incomprehen- 
sible to  Denominatlonalists,  149 ;  Scrip- 
ture on  the  visibility  of,  160;  visibility 
of,  proved  by  history,  the  Sacrament  of 
Baptism,   the    Councils,   Persecutions 
ana       Excommunications,      168-169 ; 
founded  by  Christ,  perpetuated  by  suc- 
cessors of  the  Apostles,  172-188 ;  none 
without  Bishops,  175,  185 ;  the  Ark  of 
Salvation,  188-194 ;  founded  by  Christ 
and  perpetuated  by   Bishops  of  the 
Apostolic  Succession,  the  Depository  of 
Sacramental  grace,  191-199 ;  Catholic, 
covenanted  salvation  limited  to  it,  211 ; 
British,    not  a  Roman  mission,  237; 
American  Episcopal,  free  from  Roman 
errors,  257  ;  Colonial  period  of,  263-275 ; 
Episcopal,  why  called  the  Church,  and 
the  American  Church  ?  264 ;  the  Mother 
of  English  speaking  Christianity,  264  ; 
the  National  period,  276-310 ;  American 
Episcopal,    prejudices    against,    287; 
American  Episcopal,  classed  as  a  sect, 
chief  cause  of  slow  growth,  302 ;  Ameri- 
can Episcopal,  future  prospects  of,  309 ; 
American  Episcopal,  objections  to,  311- 
353;    American   Episcopal,   the  most 
Scriptural  and  Apostolic,  356-359 ;  Cath- 
olicity of  the  Episcopal,   tested,  360 ; 
American   Episcopal,   the   Church   of 
our  race.  361 ;   the    Roman,  why  not 
join  it?  361 ;  Anglican  Communion  ad- 
milted  hy  Romans  and  Greeks  to  be 
the  Church  of  the  English  Race,  368 ; 
American  Episcopal,  as  a  school,  372  ; 
American  Episcopal,  superior  educa- 
tional system  of,  376 ;  American  Epis- 
copal, doctrinal  stability  of,  381-386; 
American  Episcopal,  Comprehensive- 
ness of,  391 ;  AmericAn  Episcopal,  the 
Church  of  the  poor.  464-465 ;  American 
Episcopal  a  Catholic  Church,  explana- 
tion of  the  term,  477-480 ;  Objections  to, 
311-356. 
Church  Government,  Presbyterian  explan- 
ation concerning  the  development  of 
Episcopacy,  180-185;  Bishop  Griswold 
on  Presbyterian  hypothesis,  406-408; 


John  Wesley  on  "  The  Ministerial  Of- 
fice," 436-440.  ,      ^ 
Church  Members,  uninstructed,  5 ;  isolated, 
5-9;  course  to  be  pursued  by  such,  7; 
exhortations  to,  9. 
Church  Membership,  15-50 ;  the  obligations 
to,  15-29;  necessity  of,  on  the  part  ol 
those  who  would  serve  Christ,  194. 
Church  of  Americans,  the,  justification  of 

the  use  of  this  title,  264. 
Church  of  England,  the,  reviled  by  early 
Denominatlonalists,  204 ;   the  Mother, 
217-258 ;  evidence  of  its  continuity,  225- 
235,  440 ,  Estates  of,  not  claimed  by  the 
Church  of  Rome,  '227 ;  robbed  by  the 
Popes,  '231 ;  not  originally  a  Mission  of 
Rome,  '236-242;  Roman  encroachments 
upon,  and  their  resistance,  '242-'258;  in- 
dependence of,  evidence  by  the  Magna 
Charta,  247 ;  impartial  testimony  con- 
cerning her  excellency,  '255 ;  on  the  91K) 
years'  leaseofproperty,  227-229, 440-441 ; 
continuity  of,  proved  by  the  uninter- 
rupted succession  of  her  Bishoj>s,  441- 
443 ;  did  not  secede  from  Rome,  443-444. 
Churches,  human,  identification  with,  sin- 
ful, 31 ;  National,  denied  by  Romanists, 
40 ;  National,  testimony  of  "  Janus,"  45 ; 
Jewish  and  Christian,   Divinely    ap 
pointed  government  of  polyarchical, 
not  monarchical,  105. 
aty  Congregations,  obligations  of,  to  rural 
Missions,  5 ;  indebtedness  of,  to  village 
Churches,  6. 
Civil    War,    eflFect    upon    the    Episcopal 

Church,  296,301. 
"  avilita  Cattolica,"  84. 
Civilizations,  so  far  all  founded  on  religion, 

23. 
Clairns,  Roman,  unknown  in   the  early 
ages,    33;     respecting     America    ex- 
amined, 362. 
Clarke,  Dr..  encomium  of,  on  the  Book  of 

Common  Prayer,  421. 
Class,  middle,  constitutes  the  principal  part 
of  the  Episcopal  Church,  328 ;  poor,  as 
welcome  in  the  Episcopal  Church  as 
elsewhere,  329 ;  upper,  the  genius  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  as  manifested   in 
making  the  most  of  her  adherents,  328. 
Clay,  Henrv,  on  the   importance  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  299;  interesting  cor- 
respondence about,  with  reminiscences 
of,  448-451. 
Coincidences,  remarkable,  at  the  Vatican, 

59. 
Coke.  Dr.,  application  for  Consecration  as 

Bishop,  48. 
College  of  Apostles  to  continue  to  the  end 

of  the  world,  173. 
Colonial  Church,  the,  263-275;  originally 
under  the  supervision  of  the  Bishop  of 
London,  265,  278. 
Columbus,  Christopher,  his  discoveries  in 
the  Western  world,  362 ;  Spanish  and 
Papal  claims  based  upon  them,  363. 
Commission,  Ministerial,  the,  to  the  Apos- 
tles,  40;  the  Divine,  always  accom- 


INDEX. 


493 


panied  by  the  testimony  of  miracles, 
210-211, 338. 

Communion,  the  Pope  offers  restoration  to 
the    Anglican   Church,  130. 

Communion,  Holy,  rubrical  directions  af- 
fecting admission  to,  o:>6. 

Conference,  Augustine  and  British  Bish- 
ops, 242. 

Confession  of  Christ,  how  made,  21,  460. 

Confession,  Westminster,  anecdote  concern- 
ing, '26;  on  the  necessity  of  Church 
membership,  194 ;  dialogue  concerning, 
352. 

Confirmation,  a  condition  of  Communion 
in  the  Episcopal  Church,  336,  4G0. 

Congregational  "  meeting-house  "  changed 
to  "  Church,"  37. 

Congregationalists,  the,  when  formed,  34 ; 
self-constituted  organization  of,  170; 
left  Calvinism,  384 ;  five  signers  of  the 
Constitution,  413-414 ;  thirteen  signers 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
469-470 ;  their  claim  of  laying  the  foun- 
dations of  American  independence 
disproved,  469-471 ;  to  pass  away, 
473. 

Consecration,  Dr.  Seabury's  280 ;  effect  of, 

'.:82. 

Constitution,  the,  of  the  United  States  and 
the  faith  of  its  framers,  413-414. 

Continuity  of  the  English  Church,  217  235; 
illustrated,  2'22-'225. 

Contradictions  of  Pnpal  utterances,  70. 

Contrast  between  Episcopal  Church  com- 
prehensiveness and  Denominational 
narrowness,  342. 

Controversy  between  Anglicans  and  Rom- 
ans, 51-140;  points  passed  over,  146; 
between  Anghcans  and  Denominatlon- 
alists, 147-214. 

Conversion,  of  Abraham,  the  Jew,  to  Chris- 
tianity, 117  ;  of  the  Anglo-Saxons,  238- 
241. 

Converts  to  the  Episcopal  Church,  4 ;  Yale, 
the  President  and  Faculty,  271-272 ;  to 
Episcopacy  from  other  ministries,  305. 

Council,  Church,  the  only,  recorded  in  the 
New  Testament,  102. 

Council,  of  Bari,  242;  of  Cartha^fC,  151;  of 
Chalcedon,  104 ;  of  Constantinople.  9(> ; 
of  NicfD,  96;  of  Trent,  43,  44, 112 ;  Eng- 
lish Prelates  invited  to  Council  of 
Trent,  139. 

Covenant,  necessity  of,  189 ;  none  outside 
of  the  Apostolic  Church,  190. 

Covenanted  salvation  limited  to  the  Cath- 
olic Church,  211. 

Coxe,  Bp.,  on  non  church  membership, 
21-22. 

Creed,  Roman,  changes  in,  66. 

Cromwell,  Oliver,  the  character  of,  253. 

Cummins,  the,  schism,  302 ;  the  untenabil- 
ity  of  their  position  and  the  invalidity 
of  their  orders  shown,  452-459. 

Cup,  the,  withheld  from  the  Laity  by 
Romanists,  67. 


D 


ALBUS,  M.,  on  Anglican  Orders,  133. 
Damnation  of  Infants,  70,  384. 


Dancing,  the  attitude  of  the  Episcopal 
Church  towards,  462-464. 

Dark  Ages,  the,  107  ;  gold  drawn  from  Eng- 
land by  Rome  during,  231. 

Dates  of  formation  of  I^nominational  or- 
ganizations, 34 ;  of  Roman  heresies,  66- 
67. 

Declaration  of  Independence,  influence  of, 
on  the  Colonial  Church,  278 ;  two-thirds 
of  the  signers  Episcopalians,  378 ;  faith 
of  the  signers,  4(!9-470. 

Declaration  of  Rights,  the  Virginian,  290. 

Decrees,  Papal,  64 ;  spurious,  109. 

Decretals  of  Isidore,  Papacy  built  upon,  109. 

Depreciation  of  ceremonial  observances, 
196,  2r2. 

DeMaistre,  Count,  on  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion and  Christian  Unity,  389. 

Denominational  Sacraments,  benefit  of, 
195;  ministry  and  Sacraments,  206; 
clei^y  joining  the  American  Episcopal 
Church,  305 ;  educational  system  com- 
pared with  that  of  Episcopal  Church, 
376 ;  latitudinarianism  of,  ;^l-385. 

Denominationalism,  change  which  has 
come  over  it  due  to  Episcopalian,  not 
Roman,  influence,  309;  rapid  growth 
not  an  evidence  of  Catholicity,  339  ;  cer- 
emonial resemblance  to  Romanism,  349. 

Denominatlonalists,  their  conception  of  the 
Church,  33-38,  48,  150,  3:J2;  advantage 
of  Anglicans  over,  in  the  Roman  con- 
troversy, 53 ;  controversy  with,  147-214 ; 
where  they  and  Episcopalians  part 
company,  155;  textscitedby  them,  161, 
164-168 ;  Episcopalians  more  liberal  in 
their  treatment  ofother  Christians  than, 
201 ;  unchurched  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, 204 ;  reviled  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, '204 ;  more  exclusive  than  Episco- 
Salians,  339-342;  and  Romanists,  con- 
icting  testimony  of,  concerning  the 
Episcopal  Church,  34  i ;  agreement  with 
Episcopalians  in  regard  to  the  necessity 
of  a  valid  ministerial  commission,  369. 

Denominations,  when  founded,  34 ;  impos- 
sibility of  removing  doubt  concerning 
their  Catholicity,  38 ;  founders  of,  more 
in  harmony  with  Episcopalians  than 
their  professed  followers,  48 ;  no  more 
free  from  Roman  error  and  superstitions 
than  the  Episcopal  Church,  257 ;  had 
their  rise  in  the  bigotry  of  schismatics, 
340-341;  departure  of,  from  their 
founders,  383 ;  have  passed  and  will 
pass  away,  471-473. 

Different  schools  of  thought  included  in 
the  Episcopal thurch, 342. 

Diocesan  system,  development  of  the,  102. 

Disciples,  name  given  to  them  indicates  the 
visibility  of  the  Church,  160. 

Distinction  between  Christiana  and  Christ- 
id,  160;  grace  and  faith,  193. 

Divisions,  hurtful  among  Christians,  10-11, 
332;  evils  of,  amon^  Christians  illus- 
trated by  the  Mississippi  at  flood  time, 
11 ;  unhistifiable,  202  ;  heresy  and,  in- 
separable, 382 ;  hinders  the  evangeliza- 
tion of  the  world,  388. 


494 


INDEX. 


I 


Doctrines  of  tTansubetantiation,  purgatory 
and  Indulgences  introduced  by  Rome. 
67  ;  ofinfallibilityeifectually  disproved 
by  Leo  XIIl.'s  decree  of  the  invalidity 
of  Anglican  Orders,  140 ;  of  intention, 
135,  140;  Denominational,  recognized 
in  the  Episcopal  Church.  390. 

Doddridge,  Dr.,  encomium  of,  on  the  Book 
ofCommon  Prayer,  419. 

DoUinger,  Von,  chief  editor  of  "  The  Pope 
and  the  Council,"  under  the  nom  de 
plume  of  "Janus."  46;  rejection  of 
Papal  infallibility  by,  M ;  on  Peter  s 
Roman  Episcopate,  91 ;  on  the  validity 
of  Episcopal  succession,  143. 

Drummond,  H.,  on  the  need  of  Churches, 

24 

Duchesne,  Abbe,  on  the  validity  of  Angli- 
can Orders,  134. 

Duty  of  Obedience,  17-19;  of  Church  mem- 
bership, 19-23. 

jpcCLESIA,ihe  signification  of,  159. 

-C/  Ecdesia  Anglicana,  the  continuity  of, 
proved,  221-2;5.-),  2fvi.  ,      . 

Ecclesiastical  view  of  Christianity,  impor- 
tance  of  the  vi. 

Ecclesiastical  year,  the,  as  an  educator, 
309,  373-374. 

Ecumenical  Councils,  63;  an  evidence 
against  Papal  pretensions,  9j;  Con- 
voked by  Emperors,  96 ;  Oriental  in 
representation,  96;  final  authority  for 
ten  centuries,  100. 

Educational  features  of  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion, 371-:i81. 

Edward,  the  Confessor,  called  Vicar  of 
Christ,  1*25.  ,    ..       ^     ^^ 

Edwardian  Ordinal,  the,  similar  to  the 
Greek  and  early  Roman  Offices,  129, 

140-141.  „  ^. 

Encomiums,  by  non-EpiscopaUans,  on  the 

Book  ofCommon  Prayer,  41G-428. 
England,  King  and  Pope  supporting  each 
other,  2:53 ;  Church  of,  not  originally  a 
Mission  of  Rome,  236-242  ;  exclusion  of 
Italian  Clergy,  248.  ,  ^    ,„ 

English  Church,  when  founded,  40 ;  never 
included  in  any  Patriarchate,  103-104 ; 
continuity  of,  217-2:50 ;  lease  showing 
her  to  be  over  a  thousand  years  old, 
228,   440-441;   protests  of,  against  the 
usurpations  of  the  Popes,  2 17 ;  inde- 
pendence of,  2 19 ;  continuity  of,  proved 
for  1300  years  by  property,  440;  conti- 
nuity of,  proved  by  uninterrupted  suc- 
cession of  her  Bishops,  441-443 ;  did  not 
secede  from  Rome,  443-444. 
English  Reformation,  the,  precipitated,  not 
caused,  by  the  matrimonial  affairs  of 
King  Uenry  VIII.,  230,  234,  252;  based 
on  Scripture,  257. 
Episcopacy,  conversion  of  the  President 
and  Faculty  of  Yale  College  to,  270 ; 
prejudice  against,   in  colonial  times, 
287 ;  Presbyterian  explanation  concern- 
ing the  development  of,  180-185 ;  Bishop 
Griswold  on  the  Presbyterian  hypothe- 
sis, 406-408;  John  Wesley  on  the  Minis- 
terial Office,  436-440. 


Episcopal  Church,  the,  Apostolic  Succession 
of  130-146,  370 ;  the  via  media  between 
Romanism  and    DenominationaUsm, 
196,  ;544,  386 ;  effect  upon,  of  the  Revo- 
lutionary War,  276-277  ;  the  consolida- 
tion of,  278  ;  Canonically  the  Church  of 
America,  280;  unity  strained  by  the 
Civil  War,  286;  slow  growth  of,  ac- 
counted for,  287-302;  ground  for  en- 
couragement as  to  the  future,  304; 
moulding  influence  of,  307 ;  oWectiona 
to,  311-3,56;  not  behind  in  good  works, 
324 ;  conflicting  representations  of  De- 
nominationalists  and  Romanists,  344 ; 
both  Catholic  and  Protestant,  345, 388 ; 
resemblance  of,  to  Rome,  stops  thort  of 
superstition,  345;  not  like  Rome,  De- 
nominationalists  being  witnesses,  ?53 ; 
the  most  Scriptural  and  Apostolic,  356 ; 
Apostohc.  3.59-361;  to-day  doctrinally 
as  in  the  first  century.  381 ;  comprehen- 
siveness of,  389-:^91 ;  the  Church  of  the 
Reconciliation,  3% ;  statistics  of,  show- 
ing growth  from  1880  to  1890,  435;  its 
perpetuitv,  471-473 ;  its  Catholicity  ex- 
plained. 477-480. 
Episcopal  Reformed  Church,  the  so-called, 
?m ;  simply  a  Denominational  organi- 
zation, 453-451;    objections  of,  to  por- 
tions of  the  Liturgy,  considered,  456- 
458;  the  regret  of  the  leader  that  he 
had  formed  the,  4r)8.         ,»..,. 
Episcopalians,  conception  of  the  Churcn 
which  prevails  among  them,  38 ;  differ- 
ences between  them  and  Denomina- 
tionalists,  155;  texts  cited  bv  them 
respectively,  157-161 ;  some  celebrated 
and  patriotic,  255-256,  289-'297,  326,  377- 
381;  persecution  of,  by  Puritans,  26/ ; 
why   Americans  should  be,   357-402; 
twenty-five  signers  of  the  Constitution, 
413-414;  thirty-four  signers  of  the  Dec- 
laration   of  '  Independence,     469-470  ; 
great  preponderance  of,  in  the  world, 

474-477.  ^  ^  V 

Episcopate,  Anglican,  never  deposed  by 
Rome,  1'2*3;  the,  a  perpetuation  of  the 
Apostolate,  177  ;  priority  of  Anglican 
in  America,  280. 

Equality  among  the  Apostles,  92,  101 ;  of 
the  early  Bishops.  9S-1(K). 

Erastianism  not  chargeable  to  the  Episco- 
pal Church,  124.     ,      ,  ^     ,     ^ 

Estates  of  the  Church  of  England  not 
claimed  by  the  Church  of  Rome,  227 

Eucharist,  the  Holy,  first  recorded  celebra- 
tion in  America,  263;  rubncs  regulat- 
ing admittance  to,  ;«6-337  ;  teaching  of 
the  Prayer  Book  concerning,  457-458 ; 
the  use  of  fermented  wine  in,  466-469 ; 

Evil  of  extempore  prayer  in  Pubhc  Wor- 
ship, 314-318 ;  of  schism,  10-12,  332,  382*' 

Evils  arising  from  want  of  Episcopal  over- 
sight, 265-267. 

Ex-Cathedra  Papal  utterances,  60,  64. 

Exclusiveness.  the  alleged,  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  disproved.  ;53l-343. 

Excommunication,    120;    what  it  cannot 

effect.  203.  ^        ..  ^ 

Excuses  of  non  Church  members,  24-29. 


A 


INDEX. 


495 


Experience  Meetings,  a  stumbling-block  to 
the  shrinking  and  nervous,  460. 

Extempore  prayer  in  Public  Worship,  evils 
of,  314-318 ;  the  Anglican  view  of,  and 
relation  to,  459-461. 

FABLE,  "Nag's  Head,"  127;  references 
thereto,  133, 135,  143. 

Faculty  of  Yale  College,  conversion  of,  to 
the  Episcopacy,  270. 

Faith,  the,  of  the  signers  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, 413-414  ;  of  the  signers  of  the  Decla- 
ration of  Independence,  469-470. 

False  Decretals,  the,  their  part  in  the  de- 
velopment of  the  Papacy,  109. 

Fallibility,  Papal,  proved  by  the  contradic- 
tory decrees  aud  admissions  of  the 
Popes,  70-82. 

Fathers,  the,  appealed  to  by  Episcopalians, 
49 ;  number  of,  according  to  Romanists, 
65;  nature  of  the  evidence  adduced 
from,  largely  inferential  but  scarcely 
less  satisfactory  on  that  account,  152; 
testimony  to  the  perpetuity  of  the 
Apostolic  office  in  the  Episcopate,  176 ; 
on  the  necessity  of  Bishops  to  the  ex- 
istence of  a  Church,  185 ;  on  the  neces- 
sity of  membership  in  an  ApostoUc 
Church,  191 ;  on  the  necessity  of  Apos- 
tolic Sacraments,  198. 
,  Fermented  Communion  Wine,  objection  to, 
considered,  466-469. 

Fidelity  to  the  Church,  Illustration  of,  vii,  9, 

First,  the.  Church  Council,  102;  recorded 
Christian  service  within  the  limits  of 
the  United  States,  262 ;  Baptism  in  the 
United  States,  262 ;  American  Church, 
263 ;  recorded  celebration  of  the  Holy 
Eucharist  in  the  United  States,  263; 
American  Episcopal  Bishop,  279 ;  Rom- 
ish Bishop  to  America,  280. 

Fluency  often  a  Denominational  test  of 
piety,  460. 

Formalism,  a  groundless  objection  urged 
against  the  Episcopal  Church,  318-321. 

Formosus,  the  body  of  Pope,  indignantly 
mutilated  by  Pope  Stephen  VI.,  72. 

France,  Church  of  Rome  re-estabUshed  in, 
by  Napoleon,  254. 

Franklin,  an  Episcopalian,  290,  411. 

Fraud,  Papal,  80. 109, 133. 

Freedom  of  early  Roman  Bishops  from 
heresy  a  cause  of  the  doctrine  of  infal- 
libihty,  68. 

Fuller,  Thomas,  on  the  introduction  of 
Christianity  into  the  British  Isles,  236. 

GALILEO,  condemned  by  the  Inquisi- 
'    tion,  78. 

Gardner,  Bishop,  testimony  of,  that  the 
Reformation  in  England  was  in  accord 
with  the  will  of  the  people,  234. 

Grenebrardus,  Archbishop  of  Aix,  on  Pa- 
pal profligacy,  114. 

Gibbons,  Cardinal,  refuted,  284-285. 

Gladstone,  Hon.  W.  E.,  on  the  continuity 
of  the  English  Church,  225 ;  on  the  cry 
of  "  unchurching  Denominations,"  3;i7. 

Gore,  Canon,  on  the  Fathers  and  Papal 
claims,  89. 


Gospel,  demand  for  one  with  the  Church 
left  out,  19. 

Gough,  Dr.  Stephen,  the  case  of,  a  valuable 
proof  of  the  validity  of  Anglican  Or- 
ders, 136. 

Government,  Church,  Presbyterians  on  the 
development  of  Episcopacy,  180-185; 
the  Presbyterian  hypothesis,  406  ;  John 
Wesley  on  Ministerial  Office,  436-440« 

Grace,  Sacramental,  the  Apostolic  Church 
the  dept>sitory  of,  194. 

Gratian's  code,  the  part  of  this  literary 
fraud  in  the  development  of  the  Pa- 
pacy, 109. 

Greek  Church,  the.  38-40;  affected  by  Leo 
XIIl.'s  Bull  of  Anglican  Invalidity,  144 ; 
high  estimation  of  Anglican  orders  by, 
4:34-436. 

Green,  J.  R.,  on  the  future  of  the  English 
race,  395-396. 

Griswold,  Bishop,  on  the  Presbyterian  hy- 
pothesis, 406-408. 

Growth  of  the  Papal  primacy  and  suprem- 
acy, 101-118;  of  the  Episcopal  Church 
in  America,  slow  at  first,  278-302 ;  rapid 
at  present,  143,  304-310,  393 ;  of  the  Eng- 
lish speaking  population  of  the  world, 
395 ;  of  the  Episcopal  Church  in  Amer- 
ica, 1880-1890.  415-416;  of  the  Episcopal 
Church,  perpetual,  472-473. 


HALIFAX,  Lord,  leader  of  movement 
for  reunion  with  Rome,  i;i8. 

Hall,  Robert,  encomium  of,  on  the  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  422. 

Henry  VIII.,  King,  wrong  impression  that 
the  Church  of  Rome  was  the  Church  of 
England  up  to  the  time  of,  217-224; 
causes  of  this  impression,  221  ;  the  ma- 
trimonial affairs  of,  not  the  cause  of 
the  English  Reformation,  230,  234,  252 ; 
did  not  found  the  present  Church  of 
England,  251 ;  his  character  and  creed, 
252-2.53. 

Heresies  of  the  Roman  Church.  66-67. 

Heresy  of  Pope  Honorius,  80,  97. 

Historic  Episcopate,  the,  accepted  until 
the  Reformation,  206. 

Historical  investigation,  necessity  of,  before 
choosing  a  Church,  261. 

History  against  Roman  claims,  47,  91,  137- 
146;  appeal  to,  regarded  by  Cardinal 
Manning  as  treason  and  heresy,  47 ;  the 
testimony  of,  justifies  the  claims  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  49,  54,  143,  168-258, 
reconstructed  by  Romanists  to  their 
interest,  107  ;  proves  the  Mother  Church 
of  England  to  be  a  true  branch  of  the 
Catholic  Church  of  Christ,  217-258;  brief, 
of  the  American  Episcopal  Church, 
284 ;  the  future  of  Sectarianism  in  the 
light  of,  472,  473. 

Holy  Catholic  Church,  what  is  meant  by 
the,  477-480. 

Honorius,  Pope,  guilty  of  the  Monothelite 
heresy,  80;  anathematized  by  the  sixth 
Council,  97 ;  disappearance  of  the  re- 
corded   condemnation    of,   from   the 


i 


49(» 


INDEX. 


'!! 


!|. 


ii 


Roman  Breviaries  in  the  sixteenth  cen- 
tury, HO.  ^      r^    V  *     • 
Hooker's  challenge  to  the  Presbytenans, 

200. 


IDENTITY  of  the   Church  of  England 
after  the  Reformation  with  that  which 
was  before,  225-2:55. 
Idolatry  of  Pope  Marcellinus.  70. 
Ignorance  or  fraud,  Papal,  80,  109, 133. 
Illustration  from  tlood  of  Mississippi  River, 
U;  from  imaginary  conversation  of 
General  Moltke,  11 ;  of  unwillingness 
to  admit  human  sinfulness,   25;    of 
readiness  to  confess  short-comings,  26- 
27 ;   of  the  Church  as  a  Vine,  39-40 ; 
from  Presidential  messages,  irvJ;  from 
a  tunnel.  184;  from  Jeroboam's  revolt, 
201 ;  from  restoration  of  (iothic  tower, 
222 ;  of  the  River  Rhone,  223 ;  from 
restoration  of  the  Chapel  Royal,  223.  _ 
Images,  use  of,  inlrt)duced  by  Rome,  6/ ; 

supported  by  Pope  Adrian  I..  78. 
Immorality  of  the  Popes,  incompatibility 
of,  with  the  I  Itramontane  claims,  113 ; 
Cardinal  Baronius  on,  114,  117 ;  Ultra- 
montane apology  for,  11 6.  . 
Importance  or  the  Ecclesiastical  view  ot 
Christianity,  vi;  of  belonging  to  the 
National  branch  of  the  One  Apostolic 
Church,  vi.                          .   „  . 
Independence,  Declaration   of.  Episcopa- 
lian signers,  378 ;  faith  of  all  the  sign- 
ers, 469-471.                  ^       ^    ,^ 
Indulgences,  when  introducetl.  <)7. 
Infallibility  of  the  Papacy.  54-82 :  decree  of, 
GO ;  strong  condemnation  of  the  dex- 
trine justified,  61 ;  accounted  for  by  the 
desire  for  certitude,  61-68 ;  disproved  by 
conflicting  decrees,  heresies,  and  ad- 
missions of  the  Popes,  70-82 ;  denied  by 
the  minority  of  the  Vatican  Council,13/. 
Infidelity,  a  revulsion  from  Papal  Infalli- 

Influence,  the,  of  a  school-giri,  9 ;  of  Church 
tracts,  149 ;  of  the  Episcopal  Church  s 
observance  of  the  Ecclesiastical  year, 

309  374. 

Institutional  Religion,  neglect  of,  account- 
ed for,  1. 

Insufficiency  of  mere  morality,  18. 

Intellectuality  of  Roman  minority  against 

the  claim  of  Papal  infallibility,  58. 136; 

of  the  Anglican  Communion,  371-381. 
Intention,  the  doctrine  of,  135, 141. 
Interdict,  the  result  of  the,  115. 
Invective,  Papal,  99 ;  Denominational,  204. 
Iowa,  Bishop  of,  testimony  as  to  accessions 

from  the  Roman  Communion,  307. 
Irenaeus,  saying  of,  "  No  Church  without 

a  Bishop,"  186 ;  on  schism,  192. 
Irish  Bishops,  their  connection  with  the 

consecration  of  Arohbishop  Laud,  131. 
Irreverence,  frequent,  of  extempore  public 

prayer,  31f.-317. 
Isidorian  Decretals,  109.        ,     ^  ,,      ^     . 
Isolated  Church  people,  exhortation  to,  9. 
Isolation,  no  reason  for  abandoning  the 

Church,  8. 


Italians,  Vatican  Council  packed    with. 
55. 

ti  TANUS,"  the  pseudonym  adopted  by 
J     the  writers  of  "The  Pope  and  the 
Council,"  46 ;  on  the  Jesuits,  61 ;  on 
Papal  names,  67 ;  on  Thomas  Aquinas, 

110. 
Jefferson  an  EpiscopaUan,  289,  412. 

Test  a  Papal  55 

Jesuits  and  Papal  infallibiUty,  55 ;  "Janus" 

on.  61 ;  their  part  in  Leo  XIII.'s  decree 

of  Anglican  invalidity,  133. 
Jurisdiction,  the  Pope's  original,  extent  of, 

44 ;  the  Pope's,  83-118 ;  lexts  upon  which 

the  Papal  claim  is  built,  85. 
Justification  of  proselytizing,  13-14. 


ttxZ'EENAN'S  Catechism"  on  Papal  in- 
IV    fallibility,  65-66. 

Kenrick,  Roman  Archbishop  of  St.  Louis, 
publication  of  his  famous  undeliv- 
ered speech  at  the  Vatican  Council, 
56-57;   on  the  Bull  of  Bonifice  VIII., 

Kingdom  of  God,  the,  Christ's  great  word. 
18;  a  visible  Kingdom  or  Church,  155^ 
172 ;  St.  Augustine  on  the  Visibility  of, 

171. 
Kings  of  England,  league  of  the,  with 

Popes,  223. 

LATIN  Bible,  the.  of  Pope  Sixtus  V.,  72. 
Legal  proof  of  the  Continuity  of  the 
English  Church,  228. 

Legend,  absurd,  of  Constantine,  quoted  by 
Adrian  L,  78.  ,  .       . 

Lent,  influence  of  its  observance  by  the 
Episcopal  Church,  309. 

Leo  XIII.,  Pope,  the  decree  of  Invalidity  of 
Anglican  Orders,  132-146. 

Letter,  Adams,  of,  to  his  wife,  294 ;  Bish- 
ops' Pastoral,  on  Ritualism,  346. 

Lightfoot,  Bishop,  on  Celtic  Evangelists, 
240 ;  on  opposition  of  the  British  Church 
to  Roman  usurpation,  249 ;  on  the  Apos- 
tolic origin  or  the  threefold  Ministry, 
405-40*;.  ^        ,  ^,         r 

Liguori,  Dr.  Alfonso  M.,  on  the  relation  of 
the  English  Church  to  the  Roman 
Church,  251. 

Limitations  of  Papal  infambihty,  60. 

Lists  of  authorities  consulted,  16,  52,  148, 
216, 2rA  312, 358.  ^      .        „  , 

Lituigles,  ancient  use  of,  by  Apostles  and 
Saints,  314-315. 

Loretto,  the  house  of  the  Blessed  Virgin  in, 

Louides,  the  grotto  of  Massaveivelle,  at,  75. 

Luther,  Martin,  sanction  of  the  Htetoric 
Episcopate  by,  48,  397  ;  demanded  mir- 
acles of  the  Anabaptists  as  Credentials 
of  Divine  Commission,  211. 

Lutheran  Denomination,  the,  should  em- 
brace Episcopacy.  49;  has  wandered 
far  from  Luther,  its  founder,  883 ;  will 
ultimately  pass  away,  473. 

Lutheran  reason  for  the  growth  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  305. 


INDEX. 


497 


MAGNA  CHARTA,  an  evidence  of  the 
independence  of  the  Church  of  Eng- 
land, 247. 

Manning,  Cardinal,  regards  appeal  to  his- 
tory as  treason  and  heresy,  47  ;  on  Papal 
jurisdiction,  84 ;  on  the  opposition  of 
British  Church  to  Rome,  249,  444. 

Marshall,  Chief  Justice,  an  anecdote  con- 
cerning, related  by  Bishop  Meade,  276. 

Maryland,  Bishop  of,  on  accessions  to 
Roman  Communion,  307  ;  colonists  of, 
the  great  majority  of,  Protestants,  366. 

Matrimony,  conflicting  Papal  decrees  re- 
specting, disprove  the  doctrine  of  infal- 
libility, 71,  72. 

Meml>ers  of  the  Church,  uninstructed,  5 ; 
neglected,  5-7. 

Membership,  Church,  duty  of,  15-29. 

Methodism,  when  founded,  34 ;  a  society, 
not  a  Church,  36-37 ;  the,  of  to-day,  put- 
ting on  the  external  garments  of  the 
Church,  307;  will  pass  away  like  other 
human  organizations,  472-473. 

Methodists,  of  to-day,  not  followers  of  Wes- 
ley, 203,  383 ;  exchange  of  pulpits,  334 ; 
subdivision  of,  340 ;  one  signer  of  the 
Coustitution  among,  413-4U ;  their  esti- 
mation of  the  Prayer  Book,  421. 

Metropolitan  System,  the,  102. 

Ministers  of  various  Denominations  becom- 
ing Episcopalians,  142,305;  why  Epis- 
copalian, do  not  exchange  pulpit8,illus- 
tra^ed  by  an  anecdote  from  Bishop 
Bedell,  :i34-336. 

Ministry,  change  from  Jewish  to  Chris- 
tian attested  by  miracles;  self-constitut- 
ed, presumption  of,  210-211,  338;  John 
Wesley  on  the,  436-440. 

Miracles  demanded  as  evidence  of  Divine 
Miaisterial  Commission,  210-211,  338. 

Missionary  efforts  unsuccessful  through 
divisions  among  Christians,  388. 

Missionary  spirit,  need  of,  6. 

Moltke,  Gen.,  imaginary  address  of,  to  the 
army,  illustrating  the  evils  of  divisions 
among  Christians,  11. 

■Monothelite  heresy,  the,  80. 

Montalembert,  on  Celtic  evangelization  of 
Britain,  241. 

Montanism,  70. 

Monuments  which  isolated  members  of 
the  Church  can  build  to  themselves,  8. 

Morality,  mere,  insufficient,  18. 

Moses,  bigotry  of,  in  the  eyes  of  Korah, 
Dathan  and  Abiram,  333. 

Muhlenburg,  Rev.  Peter,  the  warrior  Cler- 
gyman, 293-294. 

tt  "M"AG'S  HEAD,"  Fable  of,  127, 134,135, 

Names  of  the  Roman  Church,  42  ;  for  the 
Lord's  Supper,  180;  for  Church  Gov- 
ernors, 181 ;  of  some  prominent  and 
patriotic  EpiscopaUans,  255-256,  '289  '297, 
3'26,  377-381. 

Nation  and  Church,  not  intimidated  by 
Henry  VIIL, '233. 

National  Church,  the,  of  America,  276-310. 

National  Churches,  the  Apostolic  Church 


divided  into,  39 ;  their  Scripturalness, 
40 ;  existence  of,  proved  from  the  Ro- 
man Church,  42 ;  existence  of,  denied 
by  Romanists,  45 ;  "  Janus  "  on,  46. 

Need  of  Missionary  spirit,  6. 

New  York  Statistics  of  the  Chief  Bodies  of 
Protestant  Christians  in  1895,  473. 

Non  church  members,  not  generally  serv- 
ants of  Christ,  17 ;  not  originally  re- 
garded as  Christians,  19. 

Non  church  membership,  population  of,  1 ; 
virtually  a  denial  of  Christ,  22 ;  unjusti- 
fiable, 24-25 ;  is  no  escape  from  respon- 
sibility, 27-29. 

Non  Episcopalians,  encomiums  of,  on  the 
Prayer  Book,  416-428. 

Non  Sectarianism,  fallacious,  3;  impossi- 
ble, 4. 

North  British  Review,  encomium  in,  on 
the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  416. 

Number  of  non  church  members,  1 ;  of 
uninstructed  Churchmen,  5 ;  of  Denom- 
inations, 35 ;  of  Denominationalist  ac- 
cessions to  the  Episcopal  Church,  200, 
275 ;  between  years  1880  and  1890,  415- 
416;  of  Clergy  refusing  assent  to  the 
Reformed  Offices  in  England,  235 ;  of 
Anglicans  in  the  world,  330;  Protes- 
tant Christians  in  1895  in  New  York, 
473;  of  English  speaking  bodies  of 
Christians  in  the  world,  474. 

OBEDIENCE,  a  reason  for  Church  mem- 
bership, 17. 

Object  of  this  work,  the,  3-13. 

Objections  to  Church  membership  answer- 
ed, '24-29 ;  that  the  Episcopal  Church  is 
like  the  Roman,  answered  by  Leo  XIII., 
133 ;  the,  to  Anglican  conception  of  the 
Church  as  set  forth  in  Lecture  III., 
199-214;  the,  to  the  Episcopal  Church, 
311-355;  the,  to  the  Episcopal  Church 
Prayer  Book  Worship,  313-318;  the,  to 
Formalism,  318-321 ;  the,  to  Vestments, 
321-324 ;  lack  of  vital  reUgion,  324-327 ; 
composed  of  upper  classes,  327-330; 
bigoted  and  exclusive,  331-343 ;  like  the 
Roman  Catholics,  343-355 ;  its  permis- 
sion of  amusements,  462-464 ;  the  use  of 
fermented  Communion  wine,  466-469; 
the  use  of  the  title,  "Holy  Catholic 
Church,"  477-480. 

Obligations  acknowledged,  viii-x ;  the,  to 
Church  membership,  17. 

Observance  of  Religious  Festivals,  Angli- 
can, 309,  374. 

Office,  the  Ministerial,  extract  from  John 
Wesley's  famous  sermon  on,  436-440. 

Official  name  of  the  Roman  Church,  42. 

Ohio,  Bishop  of,  on  the  educational  system 
of  the  Episcopal  Church,  373. 

Orders,  Anglican,  119-146;  independent 
Apostolic  strands  in,  122 ;  their  validity 
denied  by  Pope  Leo  XIIL,  132 ;  Leo's 
Bull  considered,  133-146 ;  validity  of, 
admitted  by  M.  Dalbus,  133;  Abbe 
Duchesne,  134  ;  by  several  Roman  pre- 
lates, 136;  the  Sorbonne  Faculty  on, 


i\ 


n 


498 


INDEX. 


\ 


» 


N! 


136-137;  validity  of,  admitted  by  mem- 
bere  of  the  Vatican  Council,  137 ;  Pa- 
pal decisions  on,  137-139 ;  Dr.  Dollinger 
on,  143 ;  verdict  of  Greek  CathoUcs  on, 
4^-436.  .       , 

Ordinal,  Edwardian,  wanUng  in  no  essen- 
tial, 129, 140, 141.  _     ^     ,^ 

Ordination,  essentials  of,  129;  Anglican, 
vaUdity  of,  370.  ,.._*,• 

Origen,  on  Salvation  only  in  the  Apostouc 

Church,  192.  „^    „^      v.  * 

Origin  of  this  work,  on  "The  Church  for 

Americans,"  the,  v.  ^    ,  „^. 

Osterfield,  Anglo-Saxon  Synod  at,  244. 
Oxford,  revival  of,  306. 


PAPAL  See,  original  limits  of.  45 ;  in- 
fallibility, W-82;  decretals,  64 ;  Com- 
munion, 65 ;  contradictions,  70-82, 137  ; 
supremacy,  its  development,  105-111; 
forgeries  and  corruptions  of  history, 
109:113,  133;  profligacy,  113-118  254; 
ignorance  as  exhibited  by  Leo  XIII.  s 
decree,  134 ;  willingness  to  restore  the 
Anglican  Church  to  its  Communion, 
139;  usurped  authority  in  England 
terminated,  229 ;  aggrandizements,  247- 
249 ;  dogmas  that  come  perilously  near 
to  changing  the  Roman  Church  into  a 
mere  sect,  479.  .^    „ 

Parker,  Archbiihop,  the  Apostolic  Succes- 
sion transmitted  through,  130-132. 
Parliament,  never  recognized  the  Roman 
Church  as  the  Church  of  England,  226, 
244,  248 ;  protests  of,  against  the  usur- 
pations of  the  Popes,  247. 
Pastoral,  Bishops',  on  Ritualism,  346. 
Patriarchates,  the  five,  of  Christendom,  103. 
Patriotism  of  Episcopalians,  the,  proved, 

288-299. 
Patripassian  heresy,  the,  70.  ^     ,  ^^ 
Patristic   interpretations   of    "Thou   an 
Peter,"  87;  scholars,  quotations  from, 
regarding  the  perpetuation  of  the  Apos- 
tomte  in  the  Episcopate.  178. 
Paul,  St.,  nearer  to  the  Gentile  Church  than 
St.  Peter,  94  ;  testimony  of  Theodoret 
concerning  his  planting  the  Gospel  in 
Britain,  237;  ministry  of,  approved  by 
miracles,  338.  ,    ,     ^^ 

Pearson,  Bp.,  on  Salvation  only  in  the 
ApostoUc  Church,  21 ;  on  non  church 
memt)er8hip,  22. 
Pelagiani8m,71. 

Permanency  of  the  Anglican  Communion, 
the,  contrasted  with  Denominational 
transitoriness,  471-473. 
Perry,  Bp.,  concerning  the  relative  claims 
of  the  Episcopal  and  Roman  Churches 
to  the  allegiance  of  Americans,  414. 
Peter,  St.,  never  had  any  successors  in  the 
See  of  Rome,  90;  doubtful  if  ever  at 
Rome,  91;    silence  of,  proof  against 
Romish  claims,  94 ;  not  the  President 
at  Council  of  Church  at  Jerusalem,  96 ; 
probably  oldest  of  the  twelve,  101. 
Pius  IV.,  Pope,  offer  of,  in  the  reign  of 
Elizabeth,  to  confirm  the  whole  Eng- 
lish Pzayer  Book.  130. 


PoUtics,  relation  of  the  Episcopal  Church 

Poor,  the  welcome  to  the  Episcopal  Church, 
329-330;  Dr.  Jackson's  testimony  in- 
dorsing this  fact.  464-465. 

Pope,  the  jest  of  the,  about  his  Vati(»n 
guests,  55;  dispute  of  early  Fathers  with 
the,  99;  every  Bishop  originally  so 
called,  103 ;  league  of  the  Kings  of  Eng- 
land with  the,  for  mutual  support.  233 ; 
King  William's  reftisal  to  do  homage 

to  244. 
Pope,  Adrian,  I.,  on  images,  78 ;  Adrian  VI., 
on  Papa\   infallibiDty,  82;  Boniface 
VIII.,  and  his  famous  Bull,  Unam  Sane- 
tarn,  83;   Formosus,   body  of,  disen- 
tombed and  abused,  72 ;   Gregory  I., 
ignorant  of  the  existence  of  the  British 
Churches,  40;   on  the   Holy    Roman 
Church,  43 ;  Gregory  IX.,  on  the  Roman 
Church,  43 ;  Gregory  XL's,  dying  con- 
fession of  fallibility,  81 ;  Honorious,  a 
teacher  of  the  Monothelite  heresy,  80, 
81,  97,   110;  Innocent   III.,  on   Holy 
Roman  Church,  43,  83 ;  self-description 
of,  84;  John  XXII.'s  admission  of  Papal 
fallibility,  81 ;  Leo  II.,  correspondence 
of,    denouncing    Honorius,    81;    Leo 
XIII.'s  decree  of  Invalidity  of  Anglican 
Orders  discussed  and  disproved,  132-146; 
Marcellinus,  idolatry  of.  70 ;  Pascal  II., 
correspondence  of,  with  English  au- 
thorities, 246 ;  Pius  IV.,  on  Holy  Roman 
Church,  43;  admission  of  Papal  infalU- 
biUty,  83 ;  on  English  Prayer  Book,  130, 
432-433;  Pius  IX.,  and  infallibility,  55; 
Stephen  VI.,  the  fate  of.  72 ;  Sixtus  V.'s 
Latin  version  of  the  Scriptures,  72-73. 
Popes,  original  jurisdiction  of,  44 ;  the,  ju- 
risdiction of,  83-118;  took  no  part  in 
convoking   Councils,   96;   scandalous 
lives  of   some,   113;    and  Cardinals, 

E laced  in  Hell  by  Michael  Angelo  in 
is  "  Last  Judgment."  116 ;  the,  for  sev- 
eral centuries  created  by  Emperors, 
126;  offler  of,  to  receive  the  Anglican 
Church  into  Roman  Communion,  130; 
the  robbery  of  the  English  Church  by, 
231. 

Postures  of  the  Church  in  worship,  318. 

Praemunire,  statute  of,  248. 

Prayer,  Extempore,  Evils  of  Public,  314-318; 
not  forbidden  by  the  Episcopal  Church, 
459-461. 

Prayer  Book.  Episcopal,  stability  of  the,  65 ; 
essentially  unchanged  by  the  Refor- 
mation, 225 ;  worship  objection  to,  313- 
318 :  encomiums  by  non  Episcopalians, 
416-428 ;  Pope  Pius  IV.  on,  130, 432-4:53. 

Pre-Colonial  Church  of  America,  the,  261- 
262. 

Presbyterian,  anecdote,  20 ;  should  become 
Episcopalians,  49;  Westminster  Con- 
fession on  the  visible  Church,  194, 212; 
assumed  the  name  of  Bishops,  281 ;  use 
of  Ecclesiastical  vestments,  323;  hy- 
pothesis of  the  development  of  Episco- 
pacy criticised  by  Bishop  Griswold, 
406-408. 


INDEX. 


499 


Presbyterian  Ordination,  invalidity  of,  272. 

Presbyterians,  objections  of,  to  the  repre- 
sentation that  according  to  the  Denomi- 
national idea  any  person  is  at  liberty 
to  form  a  Church,  34 ;  explanation  of, 
concerning  the  development  of  Epis- 
copacy, 180-185 ;  challenged  by  Hooker, 
206 ;  reason  of,  for  Episcopalian  acces- 
sions, 305 ;  subdivisions  of,  340 ;  drifted 
from  Calvinism,  384 ;  five,  signersof  the 
Constitution.  413-414;  five,  signers  of 
the  Declaration  of  Independence,  469- 
470:  will  pass  away  like  other  sects, 
472-473 ;  request  of,  in  1660,  realized  in 
the  American  Church,  398. 

Presbyters,  the,  sometimes  called  Bishops 
in  the  New  Testament,  273. 

President  and  Facultv  of  Yale  converted  to 
the  Episcopal  Church,  270. 

Priest,  objection  of  some  to  the  Anglican 
use  of  the  title,  456. 

Primacy  of  the  Popes  not  due  to  inherit- 
ance from  St.  Peter.  104.    See  101-118. 

Principle,  the  highest  ground  for  the  choice 
of  Church  relationship,  30. 

Prophets,  messages  of,  18. 

Proselytizing  justified,  13-14. 

Protestant,  objection  of,  to  the  doctrine  of 
infallibility,  60. 

Provisors,  statute  of,  248. 

Provoost.  Bishop,  the  first  of  New  York,  282. 

Pseudo-Clementine  literature,  the,  109. 

Pulpits,  exchange  of,  334. 

Purgatory,  doctrine  of,  when  introduced, 
67. 

Puritan  Fathers,  the,  on  the  Episcopal 
Church,  257. 

Puritan  sects,  opposition  of  eflForts  of  the 
Colonial  Church  to  obtain  local  Epis- 
copacy, by.  268,  279. 

Puritanism,  reaction  of,  towards  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  270. 

Puritans,  alarm  of,  at  Dr.  Seabury's  Con- 
secration, 281 ;  not  unanimous  for  the 
Revolutionary  War,  288. 

QUAKERS,  the,  disuse  of  forms  in  wor- 
ship, 316;  inner  light  of,  353;   one 
signer  of  the  Constitution  among,  413- 

414  ;  two  signers  of  the  Declaration  of 

Independence  among,  469-470. 
Queen  Anne,  made  provision  for  American 

Bishops.  268. 
Queen  Bertha's  share  in  the  Christianizing 

of  England,  240.    Frontispiece. 
Queen  Elizabeth  on  the  Continuity  of  the 

English  Church,  226. 
Questions,  the,  to  be  considered  before 

choosing  Church  relationship,  30. 
"Quirinus  "  upon  the  Council  on  Papal  in- 

fallibiUty,  .56. 

REASONS  why  Americans  should  be 
Episcopalians,  857-402 :  the  perpetuity 
of  the  Church  an  additional  reason. 
471-473. 
Reformation,  the,  not  dependent  on  Henry 
VIII.,  230 ;  English,  impartial  testimony 
as  to  its  excellency  and  completeness, 
255. 


Reformed  Episcopal  Church,  the  so-called, 
303,  452-459 ;  simply  a  Denominational 
organization.  453-454 ;  criticism  of  the 
Liturgical  passages  to  which  the,  objects, 
456-458 ;  Dr.  Cummins'  regret  that  he 
had  formed  the,  458. 
Reformers,  English,  the,  morality  of.  com- 
pared with  Puritans  and  Roraanists.'253. 
Relics  introduced  into  Roman  worship,  67 ; 

many,  of  Saints,  75. 
Religious  societies  not  the  Church,  ;55-37. 
Renan,  testimony  of,  as  to  the  necessity  of 

the  Church,  24. 
Revolutionary  War,  Puritans  not  unani- 
mous  for,  288 ;  effects  of,  on  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  300 ;  the  part  taken  in, 
by  the  Episcopalians,  379. 
Ritualism,  Bishops'  Pastoral  letter  on,  346. 
Rock,  five  Patristic  interpretations  of,  87. 
Roman  Breviary,  corruptions  of,  110. 
Roman  Catholic,  testimony    against    St. 
Peter's    supremacy,    93-95;     for    Dr. 
Parker's  Consecration,    127;    for    the 
validity  of  Anglican  Orders,  133-144; 
two  signers  of  the  Constitution.  413-414; 
one  signer  of  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, 469-470. 
Roman  Church,   the,  originally  a  local 
Church,  43 ;  doctrinal  instability  of,  65- 
68 ;  not  the  Church  of  England  to  time 
of  Henry  VIII.,  2I7-'258 ;  difference  from, 
not  always  defensible,  344 ;  holds  the 
essentials  of  the  Faith,  350. 
Roman,  Conception  of  the  Church,   32; 
theory  of  the  Church  unhistorical,  46; 
Bishops  in    England,    declaration  of 
concerning  English  Church  property, 
228;  encroachments  and  their  resist- 
ance, 242-258;  Communion,  no  claim 
to  the  allegiance  of  the  English  speak- 
ing people,  361. 
Romanists,  controversy  with,  51-146 ;  course 
to  be  pursued  by  those  who  would 
answer  them,  54;  qualifying  clauses 
by  which  they  seek  to  take  the  sting 
from  the  Protestant  objections  to  the 
doctrine  of  infallibility,  60;  representa- 
tions of,  concerning  Anglican  Orders, 
119;  and  Denominationalists,  conflict- 
ing testimony  of,  concerning  the  Epis- 
copal Church,  344. 
Rome,  claims  of,  unanswerable  objections 
to,  33 ;  claim  of,  to  supply  the  felt  need 
of  a  Supreme  and  Omniscient  Ruler  re- 
futed, 62-68;  comparative  freedom  of, 
from  heresy,  68 ;  Sees  which  at  one  time 
overshadowed  it,  100;  objection  of,  to 
the  Anglican  succession,  127  ;  never  le- 
gally the  Church  of  England,  226 ;  en- 
croachments of,  and  their  resistance, 
242-249 ;  interferences  of,  in  England, 
protested  against  by  Warelwast,  245; 
perversions  from,    to    the    Episcopal 
Church,  inconsideraule,  306. 
Romish  claims,  a  fascination  to  the  unso- 
phisticated, 33 ;  additions  to  the  "  Faith 
once  delivered  to  the  Saints,"  381;  her- 
esies that  change  the  Church  of  Rome 
into  a  sect,  479. 


500 


INDEX. 


Rubrical  directions  affecting  Communion, 
336. 


SACRAMENTS,  teaching  of  the  Fathers 
concerning  the  necessity  of,  valid.  19h. 

Saints,  Romish  worship  of,  when  intro- 
duced, 66.  ^     o     .     ^ 

Salmon,  Professor,  on  the  Santa  Casa  at 
Loretto,  77 ;  on  "  Thou  art  Peter."  H8 ;  on 
Peter's  alleged  Roman  Episcopate,  90. 

Salvation  dependent  upon  Church  Sacra- 
ments, doctrines  and  good  works,  2 ; 
upon  the  Confession  of  Christ,  21 ;  only 
in  the  Church  taught  by  the  Westmin- 
ster Confet^ion,  194;  conditioned  by 
conversion  a  half  truth,  190,  196;  cov- 
enanted, limited  to  the  Apostolic 
Church.  211.  ^       ». .     ,, 

Salvation  Army,  the,  is  it  a  Church  ?  If 
not,  why  are  the  various  Denomina- 
tions such  ?  36. 

Scahger,  on  Peter's  alleged  connection  with 
Rome,  91. 

Scandalous  lives  of  st)me  Popes,  113. 

Schaff,  Professor,  on  the  retribution  follow- 
ing the  declaration  of  Papal  infallibil- 
ity, 59 ;  on  the  fundamental  error  of 

Rome,  61.  .    ..«   , 

Schism,  the  evil  of.  10- 12,  3;i2;  not  justified 
by  the  plea  of  harsh  treatment,  '202 ;  of 
Cummins  and  the  Evangelicals,  302- 
303 ;  never  justified  though  apparently 
successful,  339 ;  inseparable  from  her- 
esy, 382. 

School  Histories,  erroneous  teachings  of, 
concerning  the  Church  of  England,  221. 

School-girl's  influence  in  planting  a 
church,  a.  9. 

Science  and  Romanism,  77-78. 

Scotland,  revival  of  Episcopalian  ideas  in, 
308  323. 

Scriptural  names  of  Church  Governors,  181. 

Scripture,  English  Reformation  based 
upon,  257.  ,  ^,    , 

Scriptures,  the,  appealed  to,  by  practical- 
ists,  Doctrinalists  and  Institutionalists, 
2,  49,  53, 156 ;  to  be  read  only  by  Clergy, 
74.  112;  claimed  by  Romanists  to 
teach  Papal  universal  jurisdiction,  85- 
86 ;  inference  from,  regarding  the  per- 
petuity of  the  Church,  172 ;  regarding 
forms  of  prayer,  314 ;  postures,  320 ; 
vestments,  321 ;  appealed  to,  regarding 
the  difference  between  the  Episcopal 
and  Romish  Churches,  354. 

Seabury,  Dr.,  first  Bishop  of  America,  279 

Sectarian  and  Church  growth,  difference 
between.  304, 471-473. 

See,  the,  of  Rome,  overshadowed  by  other 
Sees,  100 ;  the  Roman,  the  only  Apos- 
tolic in  the  West,  104.  ,  ^ 

Selbome,  Lord,  on  the  Continuity  of  the 

Church  in  England.  '221. 
Sermon-hearing,  tendency  to.  rather  than 
worship,   among    Denominationalists. 
320. 
Service  of  Christ,  first  step  in,  20. 
Shakespeare.  William,  on  Papal  greed,  248. 
SbieldB,  Professor,  on  the  Hwtonc  Episco- 


pate, 150 ;  encomiums  of,  on  the  Book 

of  Common  Prayer,  419. 
Sinfulness  of  the  human  race,  the.  25. 
Spurgeon,  Rev.  C.  H.,  on  forms  of  prayer, 

315. 
States,  United,  should  be  a  United  Church 

for.  12.  ,  .         ,        r 

Statistics  of  non  church  members,  1 ;  of 
uninstructed  Churchmen,  5 ;  of  Denom- 
inations, 35 ;  of  Denominationalist  ac- 
cessions to  the  Episcopal  Church,  200, 
275 ;  of  (Uergy  refusing  assent  to  the 
Reformed  Offices  in  England,  235 ;  of 
Anglicans  in  the  world,  330;  of  New 
York  Protestant  Christians  in  1895,  473 ; 
of  English  speaking  Christians  in  the 
world,  474;  showing  the  growth  of  the 
Episcopal  Church  from  1880  to  1890, 415. 

Stedman,  Edmund  Clarence,  encomium  of, 
on  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  425. 

St.  Louis.  Abp.  of,  protest  against  the  dogma 
of  infallibility.  87. 

Stowe,  Harriet  Beecher,  the  Church  rela- 
tionship of,  29(5.  445-448. 

Succession,  English,  Dr.  Seabury's  failure 
to  obtain  it,  279. 

Successors  of  the  Apostles,  Church  perpetu- 
ated by,  172-188. 

Supremacy,  Papal.  101-118. 


INDEX. 


501 


TABLE,  showing  increase  of  Episcopal 
Church  in  New  York  city,  393. 
Taine,  ecomium  of,  on  the  Book  of  Com- 
mon Prayer,  416. 
Talbot.  Dr.  J.,  Bishop  incognito,  at  Bur- 
lington, N.  J.,  268. 
Tertullian,  testimony  of,  to  the  fact  that 
the  first  Bishops  were  ordained  by  the 
Apostles,  181. 

Testamentum,  189. 

Theater-going,  the  position  of  the  Episco- 
pal Church  towards,  462-464. 

The  Mother  Church  of  England,  215-258. 

Theologians  and  Scientists,  their  depend- 
ence upon  inferences,  154. 

Thompson,  Bp.on  the  responsibilities  of  the 
Christian  life,  '28 ;  on  the  Bible  and  the 
Church,  151 ;  on  the  Apostolic  Succes- 
sion, 174 ;  on  Denominational  ministry, 
207 ;  on  sectarian  bigotry,  341. 

"  Thou  art  Peter,"  85;  five  Patristic  inter- 
pretations of,  87. 

Timothy,  the  Bishop  of  Ephesus,  173. 

Titus,  the  Bishop  of  Crete,  173. 

Tobacco  stipends,  270. 

Toulouse,  Council  of,  112. 

Tractarian  movement,  the,  387. 

Trent,  Council  of,  English  Prelates  invited 
to,  139. 

Trinity,  Advent  to,  Bishop  of  Ohio  on  ed- 
ucational advantages  of  the  Church 
year,  373. 

ULTRAMONTANE  ARGUMENTS,  the, 
answered,  41 ;  Roman  interpretation 
of  the  texts  they  are  based  on,  86-89; 


claims  disproved  by  St.  Paul's  case,  93 ; 
claims  Incompatible  with  Roman  im- 
morality, 113;  the.  apology  for  Papal 
immorality,  116;  arguments  prove  too 
much  against  Anglicans,  122 ;  refuge 
behind  so-called  "infallible"  Papal 
decrees,  133 ;  representation  that  the 
Church  of  England  was  a  Romish 
Mission,  disproved,  2:36-242  ;  hatred  of 
free  institutions.  364. 

Unam  Sanctam,  the  Bull,  83. 

Un- Americanism  ,  the  alleged,  of  the  Epis- 
copal  Church,  disproved,  288-299. 

Uncanonical   Episcopate  of  Rome  in  the 
United  States,  the,  280. 

United  States,  Constitution  of,  the  faith  of 
its  framers,  413. 

Unity,  Christian,  prayer  for,  13;  the  Epis- 
copal  Church  the  only  hope  of,  .-iStMOl. 

Unity  of  the  Christian  Church,  strained 
but  not  broken  by  the  Civil  War,  286. 

Universal  jurisdiction  claimed  by  Rome, 
83-8.'>. 

Urban  II.,  Pope,  on  the  independence  of 
the  English  Church,  246. 

VALENTINIAN  III.,  decree  of,  126. 
_  Validity  of  Parker's  Consecration, 
131-132 ;  of  the  Anglican  orders  denied 
by  Leo  XIIL,  131-146. 
Variations  among  Protestants,  Bossiiet's,  66. 
VaUcan  Council,  its  constitution  and  meth- 
ods of  procedure,  5,5-59;  remarkable  co- 
incidence, a,  59 ;  dogmatic  decree  of,  83, 
137, 

Verdict  of  Greek  scholars  on  the  Validity 
of  Anglican  orders,  4;J4-436. 

Vestments,  objections  to,  321-324 ;  a  layman 
on,  461-462. 

Vicar  of  Christ  applied  to  Edward  the  Con- 
fessor, 125. 

Vicars  of  Peter  changed  to  Vicars  of  Christ, 
67.  ' 

Vic^erent  of  Christ,  the  Pope  claims  to  be, 
84. 

Virgil,  Bishop,  Papal  condemnation  of,  77. 

Virginia  s  Declaration  of  Rights  the  work 
of  an  Episcopalian,  290. 

Virgin  Mary,  Immaculate  Conception  of, 
66 ;  believed  by  Romanists  to  have  re- 
vealed herself,  75. 

Vital  religion,  reputed  lack  of,  an  objection 
to  the  Episcopal  Church,  324-326. 

Votaries  of  Society,  the,  not  exclusively 
Episcopalians,  326. 

Votes  of  Roman  Prelates  against  the  doc- 
trine of  Papal  infalUblUty,  58. 


WAR,  effect  of  the  Revolutionary,  on 
the  Episcopal  Church,  300;  effect 
of  the  Civil,  on  the  Episcopal  Church, 

Washington,  Gen.,  communicant  of  the 
Episcopal  Church,  289,  408-411;  of 
twelve  generals  appointed  by,  eight 
were  Episcopalians,  379. 


Welton,  Dr.  R,,  Bishop  incognito  in  Phil- 
adelphia, 268. 

Wesley,  Charles,  a  life-long  Episcopalian, 
38,  399. 

Wesley.  John,  is  his  society  a  Church  ?  36 ; 
a  life-long  Episcopalian,  38,  429-432; 
followers  of,  did  not  imitate  his  exam- 
ple, 203 ;  and  Charles,  died  communi- 
cants of  the  Church,  205 ;  sermon  of 
No.  CXV  on  the  "  Ministerial  Office.'' 
great  source  of  regret  to  Methodist 
ministers,  211,  436;  on  the  English 
Church,  257 ;  regularly  used  both  Vest- 
ments and  Services,  322;  death-bed 
prayer  for  the  Church  of  England,  399 ; 
reasons  against  a  separation  from  the 
Church  of  England,  429 ;  on  the  Minis- 

q^V*oo^^,5P^'   ^^-^0 '    references  to. 
32*2.  826,  ;i.38,  341,  383,397,  421. 
Westminster  Confession,  Presbyterian,  194, 
212,  341, 

White,  Bp.,  advised  the  creation  of  a  spur- 
ious Episcopate,  277. 

^^y^^^^(^^s  should  be  Episcopalians, 
359-402. 

William  the  Conqueror,  refhsal  of,  to  do 

homage  to  the  Pope,  244, 
Wine,  fermented,  Communion,  objection  to. 

considered,  466-469. 
Witan,  attitude  of  the  Saxon  towards  the 

Pope,  244. 
Wolff,  Dr.,  and  the  Greek  Bishop,  anecdote 

concerning,  209. 
Words  typical  of  great  religious  systems,  18. 
Wordsworth,  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  communi- 
cation to,  from  members  of  the  Vatican 

Council,  137. 
World   exchange  of,  for  the  Church,  the 

only    acceptable    way   of   confessing 

Christ,  21, 
Worldliness,  the  Episcopal  Church  accused 

Worship,  pre  composed  forms  of,  justified 
313-318;  of  Apostles  and  Saints,  liturgi- 
cal, 314,  315.  ^ 

Wyckhffe,  on  "  Thou  art  Peter,"  91 ;  trans- 
lating the  Bible,  248. 

YALE,  notable  conversion  of  the  Presi- 
dent and  Faculty  of,  to  Episcopacy, 

Yale  College  converts  to  the  Episcopacy. 

reply  of,  to  the  Presbyterians,  272 
Year,  the  Christian,  the  Bishop  of  Ohio  on, 

373 ;  Dr.  Hitchcock  upon  revival  of. 

Young  Men's  Christian  Association,  why 
are  not  its  secretaries  ministers?  187; 
an  organization,  not  a  Church,  202, 

ZANTE.  Abp.  of,  on  the  Anglican  Com- 
munion as  the  rallying  point  for  di- 
vided Christendom,  388. 
Zephyrinus,  Pope,  held   the  Patripassian 

heresy,  70. 
Zosimus,  Pope,  his  relation  to  Pelagius,  71. 


This  book  it  due  two  weeks  from  the  last  date 
stamped'  below,  and  if  not  returned  or  renewed  at  or 
before  that  time  a  fine  of  five  cents  a  day  will  be  incurred. 


Ik 
w 


t 


h 


35f 


t^ 

^^fr\ 

IE 

U^ 

> 

1  /^ 

3 

<_ 

^CM 

CO^^ 

tVJ 

5^ 

TTl 

CO 

-i^= 

BRITTLE  DO  NOT 
PHOTOCOPY 


■•ill  ,1  »>i|l^«»||ia*ii|||iialllli>aJ4tirt|>iii   III,   I    11 


UAH  )  2 


